Comments on: Thinking Outside the Box http://www.naturalburial.coop/2008/05/15/thinking-outside-the-box-2/ Tue, 22 May 2012 09:07:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: Andrew http://www.naturalburial.coop/2008/05/15/thinking-outside-the-box-2/#comment-326 Andrew Wed, 28 May 2008 21:11:26 +0000 http://www.naturalburial.coop/2008/05/15/thinking-outside-the-box-2/#comment-326 Actually the debate on the safety of amalgam is not nearly as cut and dried as you make out Mike. The introduction of amalgam fillings caused a schism down the middle of the ADA when they were introduced, and debate on their safety continues to this day. As of 2008, the use of dental amalgam has been restricted in Sweden, Norway and Finland, and a committee of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has refused to ratify assertions of safety. Also mercury does "leach" from amalgam fillings, such that after a few years, nearly half of the original amount may be gone - released into the air and body. In this context (and remembering my original comment was that mercury emissions *can* be removed by crematoria air scrubbers, if fitted), my original point stands. Actually the debate on the safety of amalgam is not nearly as cut and dried as you make out Mike. The introduction of amalgam fillings caused a schism down the middle of the ADA when they were introduced, and debate on their safety continues to this day. As of 2008, the use of dental amalgam has been restricted in Sweden, Norway and Finland, and a committee of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has refused to ratify assertions of safety.
Also mercury does “leach” from amalgam fillings, such that after a few years, nearly half of the original amount may be gone - released into the air and body.
In this context (and remembering my original comment was that mercury emissions *can* be removed by crematoria air scrubbers, if fitted), my original point stands.

]]> By: Mike Salisbury http://www.naturalburial.coop/2008/05/15/thinking-outside-the-box-2/#comment-325 Mike Salisbury Wed, 28 May 2008 15:04:37 +0000 http://www.naturalburial.coop/2008/05/15/thinking-outside-the-box-2/#comment-325 Regarding mercury in fillings. The mercury used in fillings is part of a non toxic compound called amalgam. The American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs has concluded that amalgam fillings pose no personal health risk. If hundreds of thousands of people have amalgam fillings in their mouths for years without adverse health issues it is safe to say that these compounds would be no more an environmental issue in buried bodies any more than they are in live bodies. The problem exists when amalgam fillings are subjected to the high heat of cremation releasing the toxic mercury in gas form. Regarding mercury in fillings.

The mercury used in fillings is part of a non toxic compound called amalgam. The American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs has concluded that amalgam fillings pose no personal health risk.

If hundreds of thousands of people have amalgam fillings in their mouths for years without adverse health issues it is safe to say that these compounds would be no more an environmental issue in buried bodies any more than they are in live bodies.

The problem exists when amalgam fillings are subjected to the high heat of cremation releasing the toxic mercury in gas form.

]]> By: Andrew http://www.naturalburial.coop/2008/05/15/thinking-outside-the-box-2/#comment-317 Andrew Mon, 26 May 2008 02:25:15 +0000 http://www.naturalburial.coop/2008/05/15/thinking-outside-the-box-2/#comment-317 Congratulations on a thought-provoking and balanced article (and particularly for not rehashing some of the bogus statistics often quoted, such as a cremation using enough energy to drive 4800 miles). I completely support Natural Burials as an eco-friendly funeral option. However there are still some challenges which are sometimes glossed over in the war of ideologies (ie Natural vs established) and where I'd like to see some practical solutions. An example is how can the mercury in dental fillings (ie the source of mercury pollution during cremation) be prevented from entering the ecosystem and groundwater in a Natural Burial? It's not only nutrients that go into the soil during decomposition! Modern crematoria can fit exhaust gas scrubbers to contain emissions - how can this be done during Natural Burial? Another suggestio - couldn't the Natural Burials movement be more environmentally effective by widening scope and becoming the Natural Funerals movement? Those whose personal, cultural or idealogical preference is cremation may not be won over to the idea of natural burial, but could be persuaded to abandon embalming and chose a simple casket of natural materials, reducing pollution resources and energy in the process. Respectfully, Andrew Congratulations on a thought-provoking and balanced article (and particularly for not rehashing some of the bogus statistics often quoted, such as a cremation using enough energy to drive 4800 miles).

I completely support Natural Burials as an eco-friendly funeral option. However there are still some challenges which are sometimes glossed over in the war of ideologies (ie Natural vs established) and where I’d like to see some practical solutions. An example is how can the mercury in dental fillings (ie the source of mercury pollution during cremation) be prevented from entering the ecosystem and groundwater in a Natural Burial? It’s not only nutrients that go into the soil during decomposition! Modern crematoria can fit exhaust gas scrubbers to contain emissions - how can this be done during Natural Burial?
Another suggestio - couldn’t the Natural Burials movement be more environmentally effective by widening scope and becoming the Natural Funerals movement? Those whose personal, cultural or idealogical preference is cremation may not be won over to the idea of natural burial, but could be persuaded to abandon embalming and chose a simple casket of natural materials, reducing pollution resources and energy in the process.

Respectfully,
Andrew

]]>