hey, so i was at the bar the other day talking to a freind and i had a tooth ace and he ask to look at it and noticed that i had metel filling (the silver ones) and he started saying they where bad for me since they have mercery in them. i had no idea that they had mercery in them. so now im going to go to the dentist and get some different fillings. i guess the reason i posted this was because im am pissed that we no alot about mercery and what it does to people (and they have had insedences where the mercery did absorb in the body)but we have not outlawed it for the use of dentistry its mind blowing. i am also a little mad that my parents didnt think of this when they put them in for me. just worried and thought that i would put this out there for people to maybe think about it and maybe say something. i also am think of geting a mercery test done.
They do though...But it has been around since the 1800's. I mean, I haven't heard of an epidemic of mercury related poisonings due to them...Anyway.
take a look at the ingreds in the fillings. i googled it i have always wondering why somtimes i can tast a weird tast in my mouth not saying it is just the mercery but i can tast something weird somtimes
[quote name='"Apollyon1325"']Mercury is poisonous. They wouldnt put poison in your tooth filling /thread[/quote] *Looks it up*Oh nm. Sucks for you
I'm just sayin'...You don't hear about people gettin' poisoned by their fillings and there has to be an awful lot of fillings runnin' around.
Yes, there is almost certainly mercury in any fillings you have. The question is: does it really matter? The majority of studies done on the subject indicate that it doesn't really matter too much. Yes, fillings will increase your blood mercury levels, but only mildly and well below the maximum daily exposure considered safe by the World Health Organization. However, some studies do indicate that fillings with mercury can increase your risk for various health problems, particularly involving vision. Personally, given the multitude of data that support different conclusions in either direction, I think that it would be wise to remember that correlation does not necessarily imply causation. The few statistically significant negative effects that have been linked to mercury fillings have all been "linked" rather weakly. There are, presumably, numerous significant lifestyle differences in those who get a lot of dental work done and those who do not. To get into what exactly those differences might be would be to steer this thread off course into socioeconomics, but my point is that even the most mild of lifestyle differences can account for a statistically significant increase/decrease in risk for most health problems. We're looking at two populations here that are different in very important ways that involve much more than what kinds of gunk people have crammed into their teeth, so I'd take any "MERCURY IS THE CAUSE OF ALL OF OUR PROBLEMS ZOMG" arguments with a grain of salt.
i agree, but dont you think to be on the safe side of stuff and accually do stuff the best we can we should outlaw somthing that is potentialy dangerous and not nessisary since we have substitutes that are just as effective
... ya i guess maybe. i dont know for sure but i still feel i should go on the safe side and not have it in my teeth for the rest of my life.
Well that's the issue.....they're not as effective. There is a reason that dentists have been cramming mercury into their patients for so long (other than the fact that they are all psycho sadomasochistic bastards.) Mercury is just about the only thing that you can add to the stronger metals involved that will make them malleable enough to fill every last crevasse in your tooth. The composites are getting better and better in terms of effectiveness as time goes by, but that doesn't mean that they are necessarily safer. It's still a whole bunch of weird shit that just sits in your tooth and seeps into your body. The difference is that we don't even have an inkling what that weird shit might do to you (just look how long it took to get some reasonably well-conducted experiments about mercury fillings,) while we know that if mercury does anything at all, it can't be drastic enough to consistently produce statistically significant results in studies. So ultimately, I would say no, mercury fillings should not be outlawed. That would be like outlawing ibuprofen and giving people a new synthetic opioid to replace it....sure, maybe the ibuprofen was causing some ulcers in a few patients here and there, but we have no idea what the replacement may do to you down the road....