
by Dr. Stephen Barrett
Priorities Magazine, Volume 3 Number 4 1991
American Council on Science and
Health
http://www.acsh.org/publications/priorities/0304/television.html
Half a century ago, Orson Welles panicked his radio
audience by reporting that Martians had invaded New
Jersey on the fictional program War of the Worlds. On
December 23, 1990, CBS-TV's 60 Minutes achieved a
similar effect by announcing that toxins have invaded
the American mouth. There was, however, a big
difference. Welles' broadcast was intended to be
entertaining. The 60 Minutes broadcast, narrated
by veteran reporter Morley Safer, was intended to alarm
— to persuade its audience that the mercury in dental
fillings is poison. It was one of the most irresponsible
reports on a health topic ever broadcast on network
television.
Mercury is a component of the amalgam used for
"silver" fillings which also contain silver,
tin, copper, and zinc. When mixed, these elements bond
to form a strong, stable substance that does not contain
metallic mercury. Very sensitive instruments can detect
billionths of a gram of mercury vapor in a person's
mouth with amalgam fillings. However, there is no
evidence that this vapor is absorbed into the body or
causes any adverse health effect.
Dubious Claims
Despite these facts, a small but vocal group of
dentists, physicians and other holistic advocates claims
that mercury-amalgam fillings are a health hazard and
should be replaced. The leading advocate of such advice
is Hal Huggins, D.D.S., of Colorado Springs, Colorado.
Dr. Huggins graduated from the University of Nebraska
School of Dentistry in 1962 and received a master of
science degree from the University of Colorado in 1989.
Huggins has held many seminars for dentists
concerning his approach to "balancing body
chemistry" through nutrition. Basically he suggests
that many diseases and conditions can be prevented or
cured through dietary changes alone. In 1975 the
American Dental Association's Council on Dental Research
concluded that there was little or no evidence to
support Huggins' dietary claims.
In 1985 Huggins and his wife Sharon published a book,
It's All in Your Head, which combines the
discredited theories of balancing body chemistry with
the assertion that mercury in amalgam fillings is toxic.
The book states that he became interested in this
subject in 1973 when a dentist from Argentina told him
that leukemia, Hodgkin's disease, bowel disorders and
other diseases had been cured by removing amalgam
fillings. Huggins reports that his early results with
the removal procedure were "sporadic and
unpredictable. At best only ten percent of the patients
responded." Later he claimed that some fillings
have "negative electrical current" and that
removing fillings in the proper sequence and
supplementing with nutrients would improve success
rates. Since then he has crusaded against the use of
amalgam and limited his practice to advise on these
matters.
An information packet distributed during 1985 by
Huggins' Toxic Element Research Foundation claims that,
"Everyone reacts to the presence of mercury...Some
80% of the population will experience only a slight
change of their immune system which will result in three
colds per winter instead of only two, or an elevation of
2000Ð3000 count in their white blood cells. Those
sensitive 20% might experience a drastic drop in
immunocompetence to the point of autoimmune disease, or
an elevation of white blood cells of 30,000 or
more."
Huggins claims that "sensitive" individuals
can develop emotional problems (depression, anxiety,
irritability), neurological disorders (facial twitches,
muscle spasms, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis),
cardiovascular problems (unexplained rapid heart rate,
unidentified chest pains), collagen diseases (arthritis,
scleroderma, lupus erythematosus), allergies, digestive
problems (ulcers, regional ileitis), and immunologic
disorders (which he claims include leukemia, Hodgkin's
disease and mononucleosis). He recommends that mercury
fillings be replaced with other materials and that
vitamin supplements be taken to prevent complications
during amalgam removal.
Dubious Tests
Anti-amalgam dentists typically use a mercury vapor
analyzer to convince patients that
"detoxification" is necessary. Before using
the device, the dentist asks the patient to chew
vigorously for ten minutes, which may cause tiny amounts
of mercury to be generated from fillings. Because this
exposure lasts for just a few seconds and most of the
mercury will be exhaled rather than absorbed by the
body, the machines give falsely high readings, which the
anti-amalgamists interpret as dangerous. The most
commonly used device is an industrial device that
multiplies the amount of mercury it detects in a small
sample of air by a factor of 8,000. This gives a reading
for a cubic meter, a volume far larger than the human
mouth.
Anti-amalgamists may also use a voltmeter to measure
supposed differences in the electrical conductivity of
the teeth. One such device — the "Amalgameter"
— was sold by Huggins during the early 1980s. In 1985
the FDA concluded that the device was misbranded because
accompanying literature alleged that it could be used to
recommend the removal of amalgam fillings. In a
regulatory letter, the agency said "there is no
scientific basis for the removal of dental amalgams for
the purpose of replacing them with other materials as
described in your leaflet...We consider your device as
being directly associated with...a process that may have
adverse health consequences when used for the purposes
for which it was intended." The FDA action may have
restricted the marketing of the Amalgameter. However, it
has had little or no effect on the misuse of such
devices in dental offices.
The proper way to determine mercury exposure is to
measure blood or urine levels, which indicate how much
the body has absorbed. Scientific testing has shown that
the amount of mercury absorbed from fillings is
insignificant and that people with fillings excrete no
more mercury than those without them.
Dubious Ethics
There is overwhelming evidence that mercury-amalgam
fillings are safe. Since 1905, although billions have
been used successfully, fewer than fifty cases of
allergy to the amalgam have been reported in the
scientific literature. In 1986, the American Dental
Association's Council on Ethics, Bylaws, and Judicial
Affairs concluded that "removal of amalgam
restorations for the alleged purpose of removing toxic
substances from the body, when such treatment is
performed at the recommendation of the dentist, presents
a question of fraud or quackery in all but an
exceedingly limited spectrum of cases." The ruling
was triggered in part by the case of an Iowa dentist who
had extracted all 28 teeth of a patient with multiple
sclerosis. The dentist received a 9-month license
suspension followed by 51 months of probation.
Removing good fillings is not merely a waste of
money. In some cases, it results in tooth loss. In 1985
a $100,000 settlement was awarded to a 55-year-old
California woman whose dentist removed her amalgam
fillings. The dentist claimed that the fillings were a
"liability" to her large intestine. In
removing the fillings from five teeth, the dentist
caused severe nerve damage necessitating root canal
therapy for two teeth and extraction of two others.
Dubious Research
In 1990, researchers at the University of Calgary in
Alberta, Canada, described an experiment in which they
placed 12 amalgam fillings in each of six sheep. Within
two months, the researchers claimed, the sheep lost much
of their kidney function while a control group (two
sheep) had lost none. Newsweek, which accepted the
report at face value, described it as the first evidence
that the amount of mercury escaping from fillings and
being deposited in body tissues is harmful. (Newsweek's
article was coauthored by very same writer who had
panned fluoridation earlier in the year.) However,
experts in biochemistry, toxicology, dentistry, and
veterinary medicine consider the sheep study
meaningless.
One of these experts is Robert S. Baratz, D.D.S.,
Ph.D., M.D., an ACSH advisor and expert on dental
materials. In a letter mailed to 60 Minutes two
weeks before CBS aired the program, he noted:
Dr. Baratz and at least one other knowledgeable
critic also spoke by telephone to 60 Minutes'
producer before the program was aired. But they
encountered a stone wall.
Toxic Television
The 60 Minutes segment on dental amalgam,
which was considerably longer than most of its reports,
was called "Poison In Your Mouth." It
interspersed remarks from an American Dental Association
representative with statements by three amalgam critics
and four patients who claimed to have made a remarkable
recovery from arthritis or multiple sclerosis after
their amalgam fillings were removed. The most powerful
segment featured a woman who said that her symptoms of
multiple sclerosis had disappeared overnight. The fact
that arthritis and multiple sclerosis normally have ups
and downs was not mentioned during the program. Neither
was the fact that removal of fillings temporarily raises
body mercury load, so that no "overnight cure"
could possibly be caused by mercury removal.
The American Dental Association's representative was
interviewed by Morley Safer at ADA headquarters. It was
obvious from Safer's questions that the program would be
a hatchet job. After American Dental News published a
lengthy article about the interview, a sharp-eyed
dentist noted that an accompanying photograph showed
Safer smoking a cigarette. Yes, the editor responded —
even though ADA headquarters has an obvious no-smoking
policy.
After the program was aired, this author wrote Don
Hewitt, executive producer of 60 Minutes,
explaining why "the overnight cure" was a
hoax. My letter included two questions:
- If Morley Safer had mercury-amalgam fillings, did
he follow his own dumb advice and have them removed?
- How come you have never aired a program on the
most serious danger of them all: cigarette smoking?
Is it a policy of your program to attack only
nonexistent health risks?
CBS's director of audience services replied:
"Our aim was not to condemn dentists or their use
of silver amalgam fillings...Rather, the 60 Minutes
staff made every effort to ensure that our report was
balanced in presenting arguments from both sides of the
issue."
I would like to tell you what I wrote back, but Priorities
wouldn't print it.
Not surprisingly, the broadcast triggered an
avalanche of queries to dentists and induced many
viewers to seek replacement of their fillings with other
materials. Consumer Reports, American Health,
Prevention, and many health newsletters reassured
their readers that amalgam is safe. But, I fear, the
program's damage cannot be undone. In August, Consumer
Reports published the following letter:
"My mother, who was diagnosed with Lou Gehrig's
disease more than two years ago, had her mercury
fillings removed immediately after the show aired. After
she had spent $10,000 and endured more than 18 hours of
dental work so painful she once fainted in the waiting
room, her condition did not improve. The pain was
outweighed only by the monumental disappointment she and
the whole family experienced as we lived through one
false hope."
Last year, Consumer Reports Books published Health
Schemes, Scams, and Frauds, a book on quackery that
I helped to write. The book concluded: "In
(Consumers Union) CU's view, dentists who purport to
treat health problems by ripping out fillings are
putting their own economic interests ahead of their
patients' welfare. The false diagnosis of
mercury-amalgam toxicity has such harmful potential and
shows such poor judgment on the part of the practitioner
that CU believes dentists who engage in this practice
should have their license revoked." So — in my
opinion — should Morley Safer.
Dr. Barrett, a practicing
psychiatrist and consumer advocate, is co-author/editor
of 27 books and is also chairman of the National Council
Against Health Fraud's Task Force on Victim Redress. In
1984 he received the FDA Commissioner's Special Citation
Award for Public Service in fighting nutrition quackery.