Mercury Toxicity and Systemic Elimination Agents

[Guest guest]

Mercury Toxicity and Systemic Elimination Agents

_http://www.mercola.com/article/mercury/mercury_elimination.htm_

(http://www.mercola.com/article/mercury/mercury_elimination.htm)

The following paper has been a long time in the making. I first wrote it

nearly three years ago and it was initially rejected by the Lancet and the

British Medical Journal but was published last month in the Journal of

Nutritional

and Environmental Medicine (March 2001).

The end of the article has the bibliography which took quite awhile to

compile and has 124 of the best literature documentation I could find on

mercury

detoxification.

For a practical summary of the paper and exactly what one should do, please

review my _mercury detoxification protocol._

(http://www.mercola.com/article/mercury/detox_protocol.htm)

_http://www.mercola.com/article/mercury/detox_protocol.htm_

(http://www.mercola.com/article/mercury/detox_protocol.htm)

Dr. Klinghardt is widely recognized as one of the most knowledgeable

physicians in mercury detoxification and it was a privilege to be able to help

him

with this paper.

The timing is especially appropriate in light of the _mercury lawsuit that

was filed last week_

(http://articles.mercola.com/2001/apr/7/vaccine_mercury.htm)

_http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2001/04/07/vaccine-mercury-p\

art-one.aspx_

(http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2001/04/07/vaccine-mercury-p\

art-one.aspx)

Later this month on April 24 I will be involved in a press conference that

will announce massive additional lawsuits relating to the toxicity of mercury.

These lawsuits have the potential to make the tobacco issue look like small

potatoes as the liabilities could run in the trillions of dollars.

Abstract

This paper reviews the published evidence supporting amalgam toxicity and

describes practical and effective clinical techniques that facilitate mercury

elimination. A literature review is provided which documents effective mercury

elimination strategies to reduce mercury toxicity syndromes.

Considering the weight of evidence supporting mercury toxicity, it would

seem prudent to select alternate dental restoration materials and consider

effective mercury elimination strategies if mercury toxicity is present.

Mercury Exposure And Toxicity Is A Prevalent And Significant Public Health

Threat.

Chronic mercury exposure from occupational, environmental, dental amalgam,

and contaminated food exposure is a significant threat to public health.1

Those with amalgam fillings exceed all occupational exposure allowances of

mercury exposure of all European and North American countries. Adults with

four or more amalgams run a significant risk from the amalgam, while in

children as few as two amalgams will contribute to health problems.2 In most

children, the largest source of mercury is that received from immunizations 3 4

5 6

or that transferred to them in utero from their mother.7 8

Dental Amalgams Are A Major Source Of Mercury Toxicity

A single dental amalgam filling with a surface area of only 0.4 sq.cm is

estimated to release as much as 15 micrograms of mercury per day primarily

through mechanical wear and evaporation.1 9 10 11

The average individual has eight amalgam fillings and could absorb up to 120

micrograms of mercury per day from their amalgams. These levels are

consistent with reports of 60 micrograms of mercury per day collected in human

feces.12 By way of contrast, estimates of the daily absorption of all forms of

mercury from fish and seafood is 2.3 micrograms and from all other foods, air

and water is 0.3 micrograms per day. 13 Currently, Germany, Sweden and Denmark

severely restrict the use of amalgams.1

A " silver " filling, or dental amalgam, is not a true alloy. Amalgams are

made up of 50% mercury. The amalgam also consists of 35% silver, 9% tin, 6%

copper and a trace of zinc.6 More than 100 million mercury fillings are placed

each year in the U.S. as over 90% of dentists use them for restoring posterior

teeth.14

The mercury vapor from the amalgams is lipid soluble and passes readily

through cell membranes and across the blood brain barrier. 15 The vapor serves

as

the primary route of mercury from amalgams into the body. It is clear that

amalgam mercury transfers to human tissues, accumulates with time, and

presents a potential health threat. The mercury escapes continuously during

the

entire life of the filling primarily in the form of vapor, ions but also

abraded

particles.16 17 Chewing, brushing, and the intake of hot fluids stimulates

this release.18 19 20

Statements made by dental authorities which claim that the amount of mercury

exposure encountered by patients from dental amalgams is too small to be

harmful, are contradicted by the literature.21

Animal studies show that radioactively labeled mercury released from ideally

placed amalgam fillings appear quickly in the kidneys22, brain and wall of

the intestines.23 The fact that mercury amalgam fillings are banned in some

European countries is strong evidence of the clinical toxicity of this

material.

Any metal tooth restoration placed in the mouth will also produce

electrogalvanic effects. When dissimilar metals are placed in the oral cavity

they

exert a battery-like effect because of the electroconductivity of the saliva.

The

electrical current causes metal ions go into solution at a much higher rate,

thereby increasing the exposure to mercury vapor and mercury ions manyfold.

Gold placed in the vicinity of an amalgam restoration produces a 10-fold

increase in the release of mercury.24

Mercury's Long Half-Life In The Central Nervous System

Mercury in the central nervous system (CNS) causes psychological,

neurological, and immunological problems in humans.25 26 27 Mercury bonds very

firmly

to structures in the CNS through its affinity for sulfhydryl-groups on amino

acids. Other studies have shown that mercury is taken up in the periphery by

all nerve endings and rapidly transported inside the axon of the nerves

(axonal transport) to the spinal cord and brainstem.28 29 30 Unless actively

removed, mercury has an extremely long half-life of somewhere between 15 and 30

years in the CNS.1 31

Mercury Toxicity Symptoms

The overt clinical effects resulting from toxic exposure to mercury have

been clearly described.32 33 The scientific literature shows that amalgam

fillings have been associated with a variety of problems such as Alzheimer's

Disease,34 35 autoimmunity,36 37 38 kidney dysfunction,39 infertility,40 41 42

polycystic ovary syndrome, 43 neurotransmitter imbalances,44 food allergies,45

multiple sclerosis,46 thyroid problems,47 and an impaired immune system.48

Patients with many amalgam fillings will also have an increase in the

prevalence of antibiotic resistant bacteria.49 Subclinical neuropsychological

and

motor control effects were also observed in dentists who had documented high

mercury exposure levels.50 51 Amalgam use may also be related to fatigue,

poor memory and certain psychological disorders.52

There has been a recent epidemic of autism in the US53 54 and many

investigators believe that this may be partially related to the increased

exposure

infants have had to mercury through the preservative thimerosal that was

included in nearly all vaccines until recently.55

The nervous system is more sensitive to mercury toxicity than any other

organ in the body. Mercury has recently been documented to be associated with

arrhythmias and cardiomyopathies as hair analysis showed mercury levels to be

20,000 higher in those with these cardiac abnormalities.56 Mercury exposure has

also been associated with other neurological problems such as tremors,57

insomnia, polyneuropathy, paresthesias, emotional lability, irritability,

personality changes, headaches, weakness, blurred vision, dysarthria, slowed

mental

response and unsteady gait.1 58 59

Systemic Mercury Elimination

There are a number of agents that have been demonstrated to have clinical

utility in facilitating the removal of mercury with someone who has

demonstrated clinical signs and symptoms of mercury toxicity. The urine and

feces are

the main excretory pathways of metallic and inorganic mercury in humans.1 60

The most important part of systemic elimination is to remove the source of

mercury.

For most this involves amalgam removal. Individuals should seek a dentist

who is specially trained in this area as improperly removed amalgam may result

in unnecessarily high exposure to mercury.61 The following is a summary of

the most effective agents that have been documented in the peer-reviewed

literature.

DMPS

DMPS (Sodium 2,3-dimercaptopropane-1-sulfonate) is an acid-molecule with two

free sulfhydryl groups that forms complexes with heavy metals such as zinc,

copper, arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead, silver, and tin. DMPS was developed

in the 1950s in the former Soviet Union and has been used to effectively

treat metal intoxication since the 1960s there.62 It is a water-soluble

complexing agent.

Because it had potential use as an antidote for the chemical warfare agent,

Lewisite, it was not available outside of the Soviet Union until 1978, at

which time Heyl, a small pharmaceutical company in Berlin, Germany started to

produce it. It has an abundance of international research data and an excellent

safety record in removing mercury from the body63 and has been used safely

in Europe as Dimaval for many years.64 65 66 67

DMPS is registered in Germany with the BGA (their FDA) for the treatment of

mercury poisoning but is still an investigational drug in the United

States.68

The best and only brand of DMPS that should be used is Heyl from Germany.

Great care should also be exercised in making certain the DMPS is compounded

properly from the pharmacist. If the DMPS contacts metal during it will be

oxidized, so the compounding pharmacist must use nonmetal needles must be used

in

preparing the product.

DMPS Can Be Used To Eliminate Mercury Systemically

The use of DMPS to treat mercury toxicity is well established and accepted.

69 70 71 DMPS has clearly demonstrated elimination effects on the connective

tissue.72 73 The DMPS dose is 3-5 mg /kg of body weight once a month which

is injected slowly intravenously over five minutes. DMPS-stimulated excretion

of all heavy metals reaches a maximum 2-3 hours after infusion and decreases

thereafter to return to baseline levels after 8 hours.74

DMPS Safety

DMPS is not mutagenic, teratogenic or carcinogenic.75 Ideally intravenous

DMPS should never be used in patients that still have amalgam fillings in

place, although investigators have done this as diagnostically, as a one-time

dose, without complications.76 DMPS appears in the saliva and may mobilize

significant amounts of mercury from the surface of the fillings and precipitate

seizures, cardiac arrhythmias, or severe fatigue.

One should use DMPS with great caution and NEVER use it in patients with

amalgam fillings. Ideally DMPS should be administered after 25 grams of

ascorbic

acid administered intravenously. This will minimize any potential toxicity

from the DMPS.

Even though DMPS has a high affinity for mercury, the highest affinity

appears to be for copper and zinc77 and supplementation needs to be used to not

avoid depleting these beneficial minerals. Zinc is particularly important when

undergoing mercury chelation.78 DMPS is administered over a five-minute

period since hypotensive effects are possible when given intravenously as a

bolus.79 80 Other possible side effects include allergic reactions and skin

rashes.

 

DMSA

DMSA (meso-2, 3-dimercaptosucccinic acid) is another mercury chelating

agent. It is the only chelating agent other than cilantro and d-penicillamine81

that penetrates brain cells. DMSA removes mercury both via the kidneys and via

the bile.82 The sulfhydryl groups in both DMPS and DMSA bind very tightly to

mercury.

DMSA has three distinct disadvantages relative to DMPS.

First, DMPS appears to remain in the body for a longer time than DMSA.83

Secondly, DMPS acts more quickly than DMSA, probably because its

distribution is both intracellular and extracellular.84

Thirdly, preparations of DMPS are available for intravenous or intramuscular

use, while DMSA is available only in oral form.85 Since succinic acid is

used in the citric acid cycle inside the cell, DMSA has been suspected for

displacing mercury towards the inside of the cell86 after binding mercury

somewhere on its way from the intestine to the succinic acid deficient cell.

We propose therefore that DMSA be used late in the mercury elimination

process, after the connective tissue mercury load has been reduced with DMPS.

The

standard dose of DMSA is 5-10 mg/kg twice a day for two weeks. The DMSA is

then stopped for two weeks and then the cycle is repeated.

Chlorella

Algae and other aquatic plants possess the capacity to take up toxic trace

metals from their environment, resulting in an internal concentration greater

than those of the surrounding waters.87 This property has been exploited as a

means for treating industrial effluent containing metals before they are

discharged, and to recover the bioavailable fraction of the metal.88

Chlorella has been shown to develop resistance to cadmium contaminated

waters by synthesizing metal-binding proteins.89 A book written for the mining

industry, Biosorption of Heavy Metals,90 details how miners use these

organisms

to increase the yield of precious metals in old mines. The

mucopolysaccharides in chlorella's cell wall absorb rather large amounts of

toxic metals

similar to an ion exchange resin.

Chlorella also enhances mobilization of mercury compartmentalized in

non-neurologic structures such as the gut wall,91 muscles, ligaments,

connective

tissue, and bone.

High doses of chlorella have been found to be very effective in Germany for

mercury elimination.92

Chlorella is an important part of the systemic mercury elimination program,

as approximately 90% of the mercury is eliminated through the stool. Using

large doses of chlorella facilitates fecal mercury excretion. After the

intestinal mercury burden is lowered, mercury will more readily migrate into

the

intestine from other body tissues from where chlorella will effectively remove

it.

Chlorella is not tolerated by about one-third of people due to

gastrointestinal distress. Chitosan can be effectively used as an alternative

in these

individuals. Chitosan makes up most of the hull of insects shellfish and also

bind metals like mercury from the lumen of the intestines.93 94 95

Cilantro

Omura determined that cilantro could mobilize mercury and other toxic metals

rapidly from the CNS.96 97

Cilantro mobilizes mercury, aluminum, lead and tin stored in the brain and

in the spinal cord and moves it into the connective tissues. The mobilized

mercury appears to be either excreted via the stool, the urine, or translocated

into more peripheral tissues.

The mechanism of action is unknown. Cilantro alone often does not remove

mercury from the body; it often only displaces the metals form intracellularly

or from deeper body stores to more superficial structures, from where it can

be easier removed with the previously described agents. The use of cilantro

with DMSA or DMPS has produced an increase in motor nerve function.98

Potentiating Agents

Adequate sulfur stores are necessary to facilitate mercury's binding to

sulfhydryl groups.

Many individual's sulfur stores are greatly depleted which impairs sulfur

containing chelating or complexing agents, such as DMPS or DMSA, effectiveness

as they are metabolized and utilized as a source of sulfur. Sulfur containing

natural substances, like garlic99 100 and MSM (methylsulfonylmethane) may

also serve as an effective agent to supply organic sulfur for

detoxification.101

Fresh garlic is preferred as it has many other recently documented

benefits.102 103 104 The garlic is consumed just below the threshold of social

unacceptability, which is typically 1-2 cloves per day.

Antioxidants

Vitamin E doses of 400 I.U per day have been shown to have a protective

effect when the brain is exposed to methyl-mercury.68 105 Selenium, 200-400 mcg

daily,106 107 108 109 is a particularly important trace mineral in mercury

elimination and should be used for most patients.

Selenium facilitates the function of glutathione, which is also important

in mercury detoxification.110 111 112 Some clinicians find repetitive high

dose intravenous glutathione useful, especially in neurologically compromised

patients.

There is a suggestion in a rat model that lipoic acid may also be useful,113

but some clinicians are concerned about the potential of lipoic acid to

bring mercury into the brain early in the stages of chelation, similar to DMSA

and N-acetylcysteine (NAC), which has also been used in mercury chelation.114

Doses larger than 50-100 mg per day should be used with caution.

Vitamin C is also a helpful supplement for mercury elimination as it will

tend to mobilize mercury from intracellular stores.115 116 117 118 119 120

Some clinicians will use it intravenously in doses of 25-100 grams IV in

preference to DMPS and DMSA.

Hyaluronic acid (HA) is a major carbohydrate component of the extracellular

matrix and can be found in the skin, joints, eyes and most other organs and

tissues.121 HA is utilized in many chemotherapy protocols as a potentiating

agent.122 HA is also being utilized for many novel applications in medicine.123

124 Personal experience has shown that the addition of 2 ml with the DMPS

tends to improve the excretion of mercury by two to four fold with virtually no

toxicity.

Conclusion

We have described the significant toxicities associated with mercury

amalgams and treatment agents that both authors have used successfully over the

past

two decades to eliminate mercury and resolve many chronic health complaints.

Considering the weight of evidence supporting amalgam toxicity it would seem

prudent to select alternative dental restoration materials.

 

Joseph Mercola, DO.

Medical Director

_Natural Health Center_ (http://naturalhealthcenter.mercola.com/)

Dietrich Klinghardt, M.D., Ph.D.

Medical Director

American Academy of Neural Therapy

 

 

 

 

_Bibliography_

(http://www.mercola.com/article/mercury/mercury_elimination2.htm)

_http://www.mercola.com/article/mercury/mercury_elimination2.htm_

(http://www.mercola.com/article/mercury/mercury_elimination2.htm)

 

1 Toxicological Profile For Mercury. U.S.Department Of Health & Human

Services, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, March 1999

Published by

Division of Toxicology/Toxicology Information Branch, 1600 Clifton Road NE,

E-29, Atlanta, Georgia 3033

2 Richardson GM. Assessment of mercury exposure and risks from dental

amalgam. Medical Devices Bureau, Environmental Health Directorate, 1995 Health

Canada.

3 Stajich GV, Lopez GP, Harry SW, et al. Iatrogenic exposure to mercury

after hepatitis B vaccination in preterm infants. J Pediatr. 2000

May;136(5):679-81.

4 Pless R, Risher JF. Mercury, infant neurodevelopment, and vaccination. J

Pediatr. Mercury, infant neurodevelopment, and vaccination. 2000

May;136(5):571-3.

5 Offit PA. Preventing harm from thimerosal in vaccines. JAMA. 2000 Apr

26;283(16):2104.

6 No authors listed. From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Recommendations regarding the use of vaccines that contain thimerosal as a

preservative. JAMA. 1999 Dec 8;282(22):2114-5.

7 Inouye M, Murakami U. Placental transfer of methylmercury and mercuric

mercury in mice. Environ Med 1990;34:160-172.

8 Kuntz WD, Pitkin RM, Bonstrom AW, et al. Maternal and cord blood

background levels. A longitudinal surveillance. Am J Obstet Gynecol

1982;143:440-443.

9. Harrison IA; Some electromchemical features of the in vivo corrosion of

dental amalgams. J Appl Electrochem 1989;19: 301-310

10 Marek M. Dissolution of mercury vapor in simulated oral environments.

Dent Mater 1997 Sep;13(5):312-5.

11 WHO. Inorganic Mercury. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization,

International Programme on Chemical Safety. 1991 Vol 118.

12. Skare I, Engqvist A., Human exposure to mercury and silver released from

dental amalgam restorations. Arch Environ Hlth 1994;49:384-394

13. World Health Organization. Environmental Health Criteria. 118, Inorganic

Mercury (Friber I, ed) WHO Geneva 1991.

14. Berry TC, Nicholson J, Torendle K.; Almost two centuries with amalgam.

Where are we today? J Am Dent Assn 1994;120:394-395

15. Lorschider, F, Vimy MJ, Summers, AO: Mercury exposure from " silver "

tooth fillings: Emerging evidence questions a traditional dental paradigm.

FASEB

J 1995; 9:504-508

16. Lorscheider F, Vimy MJ: Evaluation of the safety issue of mercury

release from dental fillings. FASEB J 1993;7:1432-1433

17 Bjorkman L, Sandborgh-Englund G, Ekstrand J. Mercury in salvia and feces

after removal of amalgam fillings. Toxicol Apply Pharmacol 1997;144:156-162.

18. Svare CW, Peterson LC, Reinhardt JW, Boyer DB, et.al; The effects of

dental amalgams on mercury levels in expired air. J Dent Res 1981;60:1668-1671

19. Vimy MJ, Lorscheider F; Intra-oral air mercury released from dental

amalgam. J Dent Res 1985;64:10069-1071

20. Aronsson AM; Lind B, Nylander M, Nordberg M; Dental amalgam and mercury.

Biol Metals 1989; 2:25-30

21. Hanson M, Pleva J: The dental amalgam issue. A review. J Experentia.

1991;47:479-22

22 Zalups RK. Molecular interactions with mercury in the kidney. Pharmacol

Rev 2000 Mar;52(1):113-43.

23. Hahn LJ, Kloiber R, Leininzer RW, Vimy MJ, Lorscheider FI; Whole-body

imaging of the distribution of mercury released from dental fillings into

monkey tissues. FASEB J 1990;4:3256-3260

24 Zahnaerztl, Knappwost et al. Abgabe von Quecksilberdampf aus

Dentalamalgamen unter Mundbedingungen. Welt/Reform 1985;94, 131-138

25. Nierenberg DW, Nordgren RE, Chang MB, et al. Delayed cerebellar disease

and death after accidental exposure to dimethylmercury. N Engl J Med.

1998;338(23): 1672-1676

26. Clarkson TW; Mercury - an element of mystery. N Engl J Med.

1990;323:1137-1139

27. The toxicological profile of mercury. 1994 publication by the US

Department of Health and Human Services (Agency for Toxic Substances and

Disease

Registry, Division of Toxicology; 1600 Clifton Road NE E-29, Atlanta, GA

30333).

28. Eggleston DW, Nylander M.; Correlation of dental amalgam with mercury in

the brain. J Prost Dent 1987;58:704-707

29. Retrograde Axonal Transport of Mercury; Bjoern Arvidson Experimental

Neurology 1987;98, 198-203

30 Inorganic Mercury is Transported from Muscular Nerve Terminals to Spinal

and Brainstem Motorneurons: Bjoern Arvidson Muscle and Nerve

1992;15:1089-1094

31 Handbuch der Amalgamvergifung, Max Daunderer, Ecomed Verlag,

Muenchen(1996)

32 Clarkson TW, Hursh IB, Sager PR, Sverson TLM: Mercury. In Biological

Monitoring of Toxic Metals (Clarkson TW, Friberg L, Nordberg CF,, and Sager PR,

eds) pp 199-246. Plenum, New York 1988.

33 Klassen CD. Heavy metals and heavy-metal antagonists. In: The

Pharmacological Basis of Theraputics, 8th edition(Gilman AC, Rall TW, Niew AS,

Taylor P,

eds) pp. 1598-1602. Pergamon Press, New York 1990.

34 Pendergrass JC, Haley BE, Vimy MJ, et al. Mercury vapor inhalation

inhibits binding of GTP to tubulin in rat brain: similarity to a molecular

lesion

in Alzheimer diseased brain. Neurotoxicology. 1997;18(2):315-24.

35 Pendergrass JC, Haley BE. Inhibition of brain tubulin-guanosine

5'-triphosphate interactions by mercury: similarity to observations in

Alzheimer's

diseased brain. Met Ions Biol Syst. 1997;34:461-78.

36 Hirsch F, Kuhn J, Ventura M, Vial MC, Fournie G, Druet P; Production of

monoclonal antibodies. J Immunol 1986;136:3272-3276

37 Hultman P, Johansson U, Turley Sj, Lindh U, Enestrom S, Pollard KM;

Adverse immunological effects and autoimmunity induced by dental amalgam and

alloy

in mice. FASEB J 1994;8:1183-1190

38 Biagazzi M, Pierlguigi E; Autoimmunity and heavy metals. Lupus

1994;3:449-453.

39 Nylander M, Frierg I, Lind B; Mercury concentrations in the human brain

and kidneys in relation to exposure from dental amalgam fillings. Swed Dent J

1987;11:179-187

40 Dondero F, Lenzi A, Lombardo F, Gandini L; Therapy of immunologic

infertiilty. Acta Eur Fertil 1991;22:139-145

41 Rowlands AS, Baird DD, Weinberg CP, Shore DL, Shy CM, Wilcos AJ. The

effect of occupational exposure to mercury vapor on the fertility of female

dental assistants. Occup Environ Med 1994;51:28-34.

42 Gerhard I, Monga B, Waldbrenner A, Runnebaum B Heavy metals and

fertility. J Toxicol Environ Health 1998;21;54(8):593-611

43 Gerhard I, Frick A, Monga B: Diagnosis of mercury body burden. Clin Lab

1997;43:637-647

44 Duhr E, Pendergrasss C, Kasarskis E, Slevin J Haley B; Mercury induces

GTP-tubulin interactions in rat brain similar to those observed in Alzheimer's

disease. FASEB J 1991; 5:456.

45 Hultman P, Johansson U, Turle S,J, et al: Adverse immunological effects

and autoimmunity induced by dental amalgam and alloy in mice. FASEB J

1994;8:1183-1190

46 Siblered TL, Kienholz E. Evidence that mercury from silver dental

fillings may be an etiological factor in reduced nerve conduction velocity in

multiple sclerosis patients. Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine

1997;12(3):169-172.

47 Barregard L, Lindtedt G, Shutz A, et al. Endocrine function in mercury

exposed chloralkali owkers. Occup Environ Med 1994, 51 (8)536-540.

48 Moszczynski P, Lisiewica J, Bartus R, et al. Lymphocytes T and NK cells

in men occupationally exposed to mercury vapors. Int J Occup Med Environ

Health 1995 8(1):49-56.

49 Summers AO, Wireman J, Vimy MI, Lorscheider FI, Marshall B, Levy SB, et

al; Mercury released from dental Asilver@ fillings provokes an increase in

mercury and antibiotic-resistant bacteria in oral and intestinal floras of

primates. Antimicrob Agents and Chemother 1993;37:825-834

50 Escheverria D, Hever N, Martin MD, Naleway CA, Woods JS Bittner AC;

Behavioral effects of low level exposure to mercury among dentists. Neurotxicol

Teratol 1995;17:161-168

51 Ngim CH: Chronic neurobiological effects of elemental mercury in

dentists. Br J Indust Med 1992;49:782-790

52 Siblerud RL; The relationship between mercury from dental amalgam and

mental health. Am J Psychotherapy 1989;18:575-587

53 Powell JE, Edwards A, Edwards M, et al. Changes in the incidence of

childhood autism and other autistic spectrum disorders in preschool children

from

two areas of the West Midlands, UK. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2000

Sep;42(9):624-8.

54 Tanguay PE. Pervasive developmental disorders: a 10-year review. J Am

Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2000 Sep;39(9):1079-95.

55 Rice D, Barone S Jr. Critical periods of vulnerability for the developing

nervous system: evidence from humans and animal models. Environ Health

Perspect. 2000 Jun;108 Suppl 3:511-33.

56 Frustaci A, Magnavita N, Chimenti C, et. al; Marked elevation of

myocardial trace elements in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll

Cardiology

1999;33:1578-83

57 Chang YC, Yeh C, Wang JD. Subclinical neurotoxicity of merucyr vapor

revcelaed by a multimodality evoked potential study of chloralkali workers.

Amer

J Ind Med 1995;27(2):271-279.

58 Yang Y-J, Huang C-C, Shih T-S, et al . Chronic elemental mercury

intoxication:clinical and field studies in lampsocked manufacturers. 1994;Occup

Environ Med 57(1):245-247.

59 Bluhm RE, Bobbitt RG, Wlech LW, et al. Elemental mercury vapour toxicity,

treatment and prognosis after acute intensive exposure in chloraklali plant

workers. Part 1I. History, neuropsychological findings and chelator effects.

Hum Exp Toxicol 1992 11(3):201-210.

60 Clarkson TW. Mercury. 1989; J Am Coll Toxicol 8(7):1291-1296.

61 Eley BM The future of dental amalgam: A review of the literature. Part 2:

Mercury exposure in dental practice. Br Dent J 1997;182(8):293-7.

62 Petrunkin VE: Synthesis and properties of demercapto derivatives of

alkylsulfonic acids. Toksikol mosc 1958;21: 53-59

63 Torres-Alanis O, Garza-Ocanas L, Pineyro-Lopez A. Evaluation of urinary

mercury excretion after administration of 2,3-dimercapto-1-propane sulfonic

acid to occupationally exposed men. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 1995;33(6):717-720

64 Aaseth J, Jacobsen D, Andersen O, Wickstrom E. Treatment of mercury and

lead poisonings with dimercaptosuccinic acid and sodium

dimercaptopropanesulfonate. 1995;120(3):853-854

65 Aposhian HV, Maiorino RM, Rivera M, et al Human studies with the

chelating agents, DMPS and DMSA. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 1992;30(4):505-528

66 Aposhian HV, Aposhia MM. Meso-2,3 dimercaptosuccinic acid: chemical,

pharmacological and toxicological properties of an orally effective metal

chelating agent. Annu Rev Toxicol 1990;30:279-306

67 Lorscheider FL, Vimy MJ. Evaluation of the saftey issue of mercury

release from dental fillings. FASEB J 1993;7:432-1433

68 Aposhian VK: Mobilization of Mercury and Arsenic in Humans by Sodium 2,3

Dimercapto-1-propane Sulfonate (DMPS). Environ Health Perspect 1998;106(Suppl

4):1017-1025

69 Crinnion WJ. Environmental medicine, part three: long-term effects of

chronic low-dose mercury exposure Altern Med Rev 2000 Jun;5(3):209-23

70 Schiele R, Schaller KH, Welte D: Mobilization of mercury reserves in the

organism by means of DMPS. Occup Med Soc Med Prevent Med 1989;24: 249-251

71 Kidd RF Results of dental amalgam removal and mercury detoxification

using DMPS and neural therapy. Altern Ther Health Med 2000 Jul;6(4):49-55

72 Belles M, Sanchez DJ, Gomez M, Domingo JL, Jones MM, Singh PK Assessment

of the protective activity of monisoamyl meso-2,3-dimercaptosuccinate against

methylmercury-induced maternal and embryo/fetal toxicity in mice. Toxicology

1996;106(1-3):93-97

73Kostial K, Restek-Samarzija N, Blanusa M, Piasek M, Prester L, Jones MM,

Singh PK Racemic-2,3-dimercaptosuccinic acid for inorganic mercury

mobilization in rats. J Appl Toxicol 1997;17(1):71-74

74 Gerhard I; Runnebaum B: Schadstoffe und Fertiliatatsstorungen

Schwermetalle und Mineralstoffe. Geburtshilfe Frauenheillkd 1992;52:383-396,

509-515

75 Baum CR Treatment of mercury intoxication. Curr Opin Pediatr 1999

Jun;11(3):265-8

76 Vamnes JS, Eide R, Isrenn R, Hol PJ et al. Diagnostic value of a

chelating agent in patients with symptoms allegedly caused by amalgam

fillings.J Dent

Res 2000 Mar;79(3):868-74

77 Sallsten G, Barregard L, Schutz A Clearance half life of mercury in urine

after the cessation of long term occupational exposure: influence of a

chelating agent (DMPS) on excretion of mercury in urine. Occup Environ Med

1994;51(5):337-342

78 Afonne OJ, Orisakwe OE, Ndubuka GI, et al. Zinc protection of

mercury-induced hepatic toxicity in mice. Biol Pharm Bull 2000 Mar;23(3):305-8

79 Aposhian HV, Maiorino RM, Gonzalez-Ramirez D, et al. Mobilization of

heavy metals by newer, therapeutically useful chelating agents. Toxicology

1995;31;97(1-3):23-38

80 Gonzalez-Ramirez D, Maiorino RM, Zuniga-Charles M, et al Sodium

2,3-dimercaptopropane-1-sulfonate challenge test for mercury in humans: II.

Urinary

mercury, porphyrins and neurobehavioral changes of dental workers in Monterrey,

Mexico. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1995;272(1):264-274

81 Kostial K, Restek-Samarzija N, Blanusa M, Piasek M, Jones MM, Singh PK

Combined oral treatment with racemic and meso-2,3-dimercaptosuccinic acid for

removal of mercury in rats. Pharmacol Toxicol 1997;81(5):242-244

82 Miller AL. Dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA), a non-toxic, water-soluble

treatment for heavy metal toxicity. Altern Med Rev. 1998;3(3): 199-207

83 Hurlbut KM, Maiorino RM, Mayersohn M, Dart RC, Bruce DC, Aposhian HV

Determination and metabolism of dithiol chelating agents. XVI: Pharmacokinetics

of 2,3-dimercapto-1-propanesulfonate after intravenous administration to human

volunteers. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1994;268(2):662-668

84 Zheng W, Maiorino RM, Brendel K, Aposhia HV. Determination and metabolism

of dithiol chelating agents. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1990;14:598-607

85 Aposhian HV. Mobilization of mercury and arsenic in humans by sodium

2,3-dimercapto-1-propane sulfonate. Environ Health Perspect 1998;106 Suppl

4:1017-1025

86 Research data presented at the annual meeting of the Australasian Society

of Oral medicine and Toxicology in Sydney, Australia, Sept.1998

87 H.B.Xue, W.Stumm, L.Sigg: The binding of Heavy Metals to Algal Surfaces,

Water Res 1988;22, 917

88 Ahner, AB, Kong KS, Morell MM, Phytochelatin production in marine algea:

An interspecies comparison. Limnol Oceanograph 1995;40: 649-657

89 Carr HP, et al. Characterization of the cadmium-binding capacity of

Chlorella vulgaris. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol. 1998;60(3): 433-440

90 M. Tsezos: Biosorption of Radioactive Species, in: Biosorption of Heavy

Metals, pp 45-50 editied by B.Volesky, CRC Press(1990)

91 M.Kraft: Bindungsverhalten von Arsen, Cadmium, Chrom, Quecksilber, Nickel

und Blei an schwerverdauliche Lebensmittel und Lebensmittelkomponenten in

kuenstlichem Magen-Darm-Saft. PhD Thesis. Institut fuer Hygiene, Sozial-und

umweltmedizin der Ruhr-Universitaet Bochum, Germany, (1998)

92 Klinghardt, D: Amalgam/Mercury Detox as a Treatment for Chronic Viral,

Bacterial, and Fungal Illnesses Explore! Volume 1997;8, No 3

93 R.Muzzarelli, O.Tubertini: Chitin and chitosan on chromatographic

supports and adsorbents for collection of metal ions from organic and aqueous

solutions and sea water, Talanta, 1969;16, 1571 ff

94 Y.Subramanian, T.Yoshinar: Studies on the formation of chitin-metal

complexes, Rep.No 27, Marine Sciences Center, Mc Gill Univ, Montreal (1974)

95 J.W.Park, M.O. Park: Mechanism of metal ion binding to chitosan in

solution, cooperative inter- and intramolecular chelations. Bull.Korean

Chem.Soc.

1984;5(3), 108

96 Omura Y, Beckman SL Role of mercury (Hg) in resistant infections &

effective treatment of Chlamydia trachomatis and Herpes family viral infections

(and potential treatment for cancer) by removing localized Hg deposits with

Chinese parsley and delivering effective antibiotics using various drug uptake

enhancement methods. Acupunct Electrother Res. 1995;20(3-4): 195-229

97 Omura Y, Shimotsuura Y, Fukuoka A, Fukuoka H, Nomoto T. Significant

mercury deposits in internal organs following the removal of dental amalgam, &

development of pre-cancer on the gingiva and the sides of the tongue and their

represented organs as a result of inadvertent exposure to strong curing light

(used to solidify synthetic dental filling material) & effective treatment: a

clinical case report, along with organ representation areas for each tooth.

Acupunct Electrother Res. 1996 ;21(2): 133-160.

98 Ewan KB, Pamphlett R Increased inorganic mercury in spinal motor neurons

following chelating agents. Neurotoxicology 1996;17(2):343-349

99 Cha CW A study on the effect of garlic to the heavy metal poisoning of

rat. J Korean Med Sci 1987;2(4):213-224

100 Lee JH, Kang HS, Roh Protective effects of garlic juice against

embryotoxicity of methylmercuric chloride administered to pregnant Fischer 344

rats.

J Yonsei Med J 1999 Oct;40(5):483-9

101 The Miracle of MSM The Natural Solution for Pain. Jacob, S., Lawrence,

RM, Zucker, M. Penguin Putnam, New York, NY 1999.

102 Stjernberg L, Berglund J. Garlic as an insect repellent. JAMA. 2000 Aug

16;284(7):831.

103 Fleischauer AT, Poole C, Arab L. Garlic consumption and cancer

prevention: meta-analyses of colorectal and stomach cancers. Am J Clin Nutr.

2000

Oct;72(4):1047-52.

104 Morelli V, Zoorob RJ. Alternative therapies: Part II. Congestive heart

failure and hypercholesterolemia. Am Fam Physician. 2000 Sep 15;62(6):1325-30.

105 Chang, L.W , Gilbert,M and Sprecher,J: Modification of methylmercury

neurotoxicity by vitamin E, Environ.Res. 1978;17:356-366

106 Yoneda S, Suzuki KT Detoxification of mercury by selenium by binding of

equimolar Hg-Se complex to a specific plasma protein. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol

1997;143(2):274-280

107 Akesson I, Ingrid B; Status of mercury and selenium in dental personnel:

Impact of amalgam work and own fillings. Arch Environ Health

1991;46(2):103-109

108 Johansson E: Selenium and its protection against the effects of mercury

and silver. J Trace Elements 1991;5:273-274

109 Gailer J; George GN; Pickering IJ, et al. Structural Basis of the

Antagonism between Inorganic Mercury and Selenium in Mammals. Chem Res Toxicol

2000

Nov 20;13(11):1135-1142

110 Hultberg B, Andersson A, Isaksson A Thiol and redox reactive agents

exert different effects on glutathione metabolism in HeLa cell cultures.Clin

Chim

Acta 1999 May;283(1-2):21-32

111 Westphal GA; Schnuch A; Schulz TG, et al. Homozygous gene deletions of

the glutathione S-transferases M1 and T1 are associated with thimerosal

sensitization. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2000 Aug;73(6):384-8.

112 Schurz(1) F; Sabater-Vilar M; Fink-Gremmels J. Mutagenicity of mercury

chloride and mechanisms of cellular defence: the role of metal-binding

proteins. Mutagenesis 2000 Nov;15(6):525-530

113 Anuradha B, Varalakshmi P Protective role of DL-alpha-lipoic acid

against mercury-induced neural lipid peroxidation. Pharmacol Res 1999

Jan;39(1):67-80

114 Ballatori N, Lieberman MW, Wang W N-acetylcysteine as an antidote in

methylmercury poisoning. Environ Health Perspect 1998 May;106(5):267-71

115 Dirks M, Marvin J; Mercury excretion and intravenous ascorbic acid. Arch

Environ Health 1994;49(1):49-52

116 Hill, CH. Interactions of vitamin C with lead and mercury. Ann N Y Acad

Sci 1980;355:262-6

117 Yamini B, Sleight SD. Effects of ascorbic acid deficiency on methyl

mercury dicyandiamide toxicosis in guinea pigs J Environ Pathol Toxicol Oncol

1984 Jul;5(4-5):139-50

118 Zorn NE, Smith JT A relationship between vitamin B12, folic acid,

ascorbic acid, and mercury uptake and methylation.Life Sci 1990;47(2):167-73

119 Sorg O, Schilter B, Honegger P, et. al. Increased vulnerability of

neurones and glial cells to low concentrations of methylmercury in a prooxidant

situation. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 1998 Dec;96(6):621-7

120 Iyengar GV; Nair PP. Global outlook on nutrition and the environment:

meeting the challenges of the next millennium. Sci Total Environ 2000 Apr

17;249(1-3):331-46.

121 Chen WY, Abatangelo G.Functions of hyaluronan in wound repair. Wound

Repair Regen 1999;7(2):79-89

122 Delpech B, Girard N, Bertrand P, Courel MN, Chauzy C, Delpech

Hyaluronan: fundamental principles and applications in cancer. J Intern Med

1997;242(1):41-8

123 Sutherland IW. Novel and established applications of microbial

polysaccharides. Trends Biotechnol 1998;16(1):41-6

124 Knudson CB, Nofal GA, Pamintuan L, Aguiar DJ: The chondrocyte

pericellular matrix: a model for hyaluronan-mediated cell-matrix interactions.

Biochem

Soc Trans 1999;27(2):142-7