This is categorized under “Anti-Vaccination” because it is under the same idea and guidelines. Assuming that thimerosal is a risk, vaccinations do not compare, and neither does mercury from fish.
Pulled from: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-108hhrg98046/html/CHRG-108hhrg98046.htm
STATEMENT OF RICHARD FISCHER, D.D.S., INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF ORAL MEDICINE AND TOXICOLOGY
Dental amalgam or silver mercury fillings contain 50 percent mercury, which is more toxic than lead, cadmium or even arsenic. These dental fillings contribute more mercury to body burden in humans than all other sources combined. In fact, the amount of mercury contained in one average size filling exceeds the U.S. EPA standard for human exposure for over 100 years.
Mercury vapor which escapes from these fillings is readily absorbed into the body, accumulates within all body tissues and has been shown to cause pathophysiology. In the case of pregnant women with mercury fillings, the mercury readily passes from her fillings into her lungs through her bloodstream through the placental barrier and into the developing child, whose central nervous system and immune system are especially vulnerable to this poison.
The fetus developing in the average American mother will be born into this world with more mercury from its mother’s dental fillings alone than it will receive from all the vaccinations it receives during its first 5 years of childhood. And I would add, those vaccines, without the trace, that was with the full load of thimerosal.
Scientists around the world have come to realize that even minute amounts of mercury can cause permanent neurological harm to young children and developing fetuses. The EPA recently announced that 630,000 babies are born each year with too much mercury in their bodies, and that one woman of childbearing age in 12 has enough mercury in her system to put her at risk to giving birth to a retarded child.
In response, the FDA has issued advisories to pregnant women and women of childbearing age to reduce their dietary intake of those fish which are known to contain elevated levels of mercury, such as tuna, swordfish and shark. But according to leading toxicologists, including the World Health Organization, only 20 percent of mercury body burden in adults is derived from diet. In contrast, 80 percent is derived from dental fillings.
As of today, the FDA has yet to advise these same women whom they warned against eating fish to avoid having mercury fillings placed in their mouth. If 20 percent is a problem, why isn’t 80 percent a bigger problem?
In 1987, upon the advice of the FDA dental device panel, the FDA accepted not dental amalgam but its premixed and separate components, amalgam alloy as class 2 and dental mercury as class 1. Class 1 is for devices that present no risk of harm and therefore are subject only to general controls for good manufacturing procedures. That’s right, the FDA classifies mercury, the most neurotoxic element on the planet, to be of equal risk to humans as toothbrushes and dental floss.
In 1998, the FDA ruled that mercury is not generally recognized as safe. However, it left dental mercury as a safe and effective class 1 dental device. Since all other medical uses of mercury have been banned, why should we assume that the only safe to implant it is in the human mouth?
Scrap amalgam, that unused portion of the filling material remaining after the filling material remaining after the filling is placed into a patient’s tooth, must be handled as a toxic waste disposal hazard. It cannot be thrown in the trash or buried in the ground or incinerated. It must be stored in an airtight vessel until properly disposed of. How can we justify storing this same mixture inches from a child’s brain stem and declare it harmless?