This is a complete copy of the IAOMT's addendum to their Petition for Reconsideration submitted by Jim Love, et al in March of 2013. The addendum to the petition added new proof of the damaging effect of mercury in amalgams and asked that mercury in dental materials either be banned or reclassified as an FDA Class III device thus restricting its use and increasing regulations when using this product.

G. Mark Richardson examines the various exposures to mercury from amalgam versus that of the recommended amount of tuna fish (EPA) and compares them to reference exposure levels to find out which presents more of a risk to human health.

The International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, a scientific dental organization, participated in the United Nations Environment Programme's (UNEP) Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC5) meeting, where nations formalized a legally-binding treaty to reduce global use of dental amalgam, a restorative tooth filling material containing 50% mercury.

The IAOMT is attending the fifth and final International Negotiating Committee (INC5) meeting by the United Nations Environmental Programme on mercury. IAOMT represents the consensus that amalgam is a risk to the environment, dental workers and the general public, and whose use should be discontinued.

Dental Amalgam Mercury Solutions, has co-filed a “Crime against Humanity” complaint with the International Criminal Court at the Hague against those involved in an $11 million mercury experiment conducted on approximately 1,000 children. The study, known as the “Children’s Amalgam Trial” (CAT), was funded by the U.S. government’s National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research.

When covering the 2010 FDA dental products panel hearing on the safety of dental amalgam fillings, the press widely promoted the "red herring" comment from FDA panelist, Susan Griffin (of the EPA). The comment was directed at the assertion that the Fawer study should not be relied on for the basis of a risk assessment because many of the workers in the study were also exposed to chlorine, which inhibits uptake of mercury (up to 40%).

Mercury has been linked to Alzheimer's disease by a number of different studies that have accumulated over the last two decades. Watch and listen to published scientists talk about how mercury can cause many of the hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease. This article was taken from the IAOMT's Petition For Reconsideration, which prompted the FDA to re-evaluate their 2009 ruling that amalgam was safe for everyone.

Boyd Haley P.h.D. discusses the findings of his published studies (and others), which showed that mercury and only mercury can cause the major biochemical hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease and how the NIH stopped his funding after he published those findings.

Multiple Sclerosis (“MS”) was first commonly identified in the 19th century during the time in which mercury/silver fillings came into common use. There is toxicological evidence that mercury poisoning victims and multiple sclerosis victims share similar symptoms. While genetic variability and individual ability to excrete mercury probably plays a role, the causation of MS is probably multi-factorial. Very serious consideration should be given to mercury possibly playing a role in the etiology of MS. 

The FDA was charged with evaluating and classifying medical devices in 1976. Amalgam manufacturers have been able to successfully shirk the burden of proving safety, which should rightfully be assigned to them. If the FDA assigns the burden to prove harm to U.S. consumer groups, the FDA condemns itself to perpetual study and inaction. This will result in an ineffective agency and an unprotected public, devastated by preventable degenerative disease.

When reporting on how much mercury is released from dental mercury amalgam fillings most journalists and government organizations cite The American Dental Association's spokesman Rodney Mackert's "estimates" without understanding any of the inherant flaws in his methodology. Mark Richardson PhD has charted out a compilation of exposure studies which shows the ADA's "estimates" are out of step with the vast majority of published data.