Dr. Jones is SMART Certified: SMART Certification by the IAOMT

Did you know that Dr. Jones is SMART Certified? SMART is the Safe Mercury Amalgam Removal Technique, which is a set of safety measures to reduce mercury exposures during dental amalgam filling removal. These safety measures were developed as a result of scientific research collected by the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology (IAOMT). 

​Read on to learn more about this extensive training and process. 

The IAOMT safe amalgam removal protocol recommendations were most recently updated on July 19, 2019. Also, on July 1, 2016, the IAOMT protocol recommendations were officially renamed as the Safe Mercury Amalgam Removal Technique (SMART), and a training course for IAOMT dentists to become certified in SMART was initiated.

All dental amalgam restorations contain approximately 50% mercury, (1) and reports and research are consistent that these fillings emit mercury vapors. (2-16)

Scientific research demonstrates that dental mercury amalgam exposes dental professionals, dental staff, dental patients, and/or fetuses to releases of mercury vapor, mercury-containing particulate, and/or other forms of mercury contamination. (4-48)

Furthermore, mercury vapor is known to be released from dental mercury amalgam fillings at higher rates during brushing, cleaning, clenching of teeth, chewing, etc., (5, 14, 15, 24, 30, 49-54) and mercury is also known to be released during the placement, replacement, and removal of dental mercury amalgam fillings. (2, 25, 28, 29, 32, 36, 41, 45, 46, 55-60)


Utilizing the available scientific evidence, the IAOMT has developed extensive safety recommendations for removal of existing dental mercury amalgam fillings, including detailed protective measures that are to be utilized for the procedure. The IAOMT’s recommendations build upon traditional safe amalgam removal techniques such as the use of masks, water irrigation, and high volume suction by supplementing these conventional strategies with a number of additional protective measures, the need for which have only recently been identified in scientific research.

• An amalgam separator must be properly installed, utilized, and maintained to collect mercury amalgam waste so that it is not released into the effluent from the dental office. (25, 61-73)
• Each room where mercury fillings are removed must have adequate filtration in place, (29, 74-76) which requires a high-volume air filtration system (such as an at source oral aerosol vacuum) capable of removing mercury vapor and amalgam particles generated during the removal of one or more mercury fillings. (45, 77)
• If possible, windows should be opened to reduce the mercury concentration in the air. (29, 77-79)
• The patient will be given a slurry of charcoal, chlorella, or similar adsorbent to rinse and swallow before the procedure (unless the patient declines or there are other contraindications making this clinically inappropriate). (77, 80, 81)
• Protective gowns and covers for the dentist, (25, 45) dental personnel, (25, 45) and the patient (45) must be in place. All present in the room must be protected because substantial quantities of particles generated during the procedure will elude collection by suction devices. (36, 45) It has been demonstrated that these particles can be spread from the patient’s mouth to the hands, arms, face, chest and other parts of the dental worker’s and patient’s anatomy. (45)
• Non-latex nitrile gloves must be utilized by the dentist and all dental personnel in the room. (45, 46, 77, 82-83)
• Face shields and hair/head coverings are to be utilized by the dentist and all dental personnel in the room . (45, 77, 80)
• Either a properly-sealed, respiratory grade mask rated to capture mercury or a positive pressure, properly-sealed mask providing air or oxygen must be worn by the dentist and all dental personnel in the room. (36, 45, 76, 77)
• In order to protect the patient’s skin and clothing, a full body, impermeable barrier, as well as a full head/face/neck barrier under/around the dam, need to be utilized. (45, 77, 80)
• External air or oxygen delivered via a nasal mask for the patient also needs to be utilized to assure the patient does not inhale any mercury vapor or amalgam particulate during the procedure. (45, 77, 80) A nasal cannula is an acceptable alternative for this purpose as long as the patient’s nose is completely covered with an impermeable barrier.
• A dental dam (74-76, 84-87) that is made with non-latex nitrile material (45, 77, 83) must be placed and properly sealed in the patient’s mouth.
• A saliva ejector must be placed under the dental dam to reduce mercury exposure to the patient. (45, 77)
• During amalgam filling removal, the dentist must utilize an at source oral aerosol vacuum in close proximity to the operating field (i.e., two to four inches from the patient’s mouth) to mitigate mercury exposure. (45, 88)
• High speed evacuation produces better capture when fitted with a Clean Up device, (45, 87) which is not mandatory but is preferred.
• Copious amounts of water to reduce heat (45, 74, 76, 77, 86, 89-91) and a conventional high speed evacuation device to capture mercury discharges (25, 29, 45, 74-77, 86, 90, 91) are required to reduce ambient mercury levels. (46)
• The amalgam needs to be sectioned into chunks and removed in as large of pieces as possible, (45, 74, 77, 80) using a small diameter carbide drill. (29, 86)
• Once the removal process is complete, the patient’s mouth should be thoroughly flushed with water (77, 80) and then rinsed out with a slurry of charcoal, chlorella or similar adsorbent. (81)
• Dentists must comply with federal, state, and local regulations addressing the proper handling, cleaning, and/or disposal of mercury-contaminated components, clothing, equipment, surfaces of the room, and flooring in the dental office.
• During the opening and maintenance of suction traps in operatories or on the main suction unit, dental staff should utilize the appropriate personal protection equipment described above.

It is important to note that as a safety precaution, the IAOMT does not recommend amalgam filling removal for women who are pregnant or breast-feeding and that the IAOMT does not recommend that dental personnel who are pregnant or breast-feeding conduct work that disrupts amalgam fillings (including their removal).

​To learn more about SMART and to see videos of SMART being applied in practice, visit www.thesmartchoice.comTo Learn the facts about dental mercury from the IAOMT, visit:  https://iaomt.org/resources/dental-mercury-facts/
References

1. World Health Organization. Mercury in Health Care: Policy Paper.  Geneva, Switzerland; August 2005: 1.  Available from: http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/medicalwaste/mercurypolpaper.pdf.  Accessed March 14, 2019.
2. Health Canada. The Safety of Dental Amalgam.  Ottawa, Ontario; 1996: 4.  Available from: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/alt_formats/hpfb-dgpsa/pdf/md-im/dent_amalgam-eng.pdf.  Accessed March 14, 2019.
3. Kennedy D. Smoking Teeth = Poison Gas [online video]. Champion’s Gate, FL: IAOMT; Uploaded on January 30, 2007. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ylnQ-T7oiA.  Accessed March 14, 2019.
4. Barregård L. Biological monitoring of exposure to mercury vapor. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health. 1993:45-9. Available from: http://www.sjweh.fi/download.php?abstract_id=1532&file_nro=1. Accessed April 18, 2019.
5. Gay DD, Cox RD, Reinhardt JW:  Chewing releases mercury from fillings.  1979; 1(8123):985-6.
6. Hahn LJ, Kloiber R, Vimy MJ, Takahashi Y, Lorscheider FL. Dental” silver” tooth fillings: a source of mercury exposure revealed by whole-body image scan and tissue analysis. The FASEB Journal. 1989; 3(14):2641-6. Abstract available from: http://www.fasebj.org/content/3/14/2641.full.pdf.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
7. Haley BE. Mercury toxicity: genetic susceptibility and synergistic effects. Medical Veritas. 2005; 2(2): 535-542. Abstract available from: http://www.medicalveritas.com/images/00070.pdf.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
8. Hanson M, Pleva J. The dental amalgam issue. A review. Experientia. 1991; 47(1):9-22. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jaro_Pleva/publication/21157262_The_dental_amalgam_issue._
   A_review/links/00b7d513fabdda29fa000000.pdf. Accessed April 18, 2019.
9. Leistevuo J, Leistevuo T, Helenius H, Pyy L, Osterblad M, Huovinen P, Tenovuo J. Dental amalgam fillings and the amount of organic mercury in human saliva. Caries Res. 2001; 35(3):163-6. Abstract available from: http://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/47450. Accessed April 18, 2019.
10. Mahler DB, Adey JD, Fleming MA. Hg emission from dental amalgam as related to the amount of Sn in the Ag-Hg Phase. J Dent Res. 1994; 73(10):1663-8. Abstract available from: http://jdr.sagepub.com/content/73/10/1663.short. Accessed April 18, 2019.
11. Nylander M, Friberg L, Lind B. Mercury concentrations in the human brain and kidneys in relation to exposure from dental amalgam fillings. Swed Dent J. 1987; 11(5): 179-187. Abstract available from: http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/3481133.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
12. Richardson GM, Brecher RW, Scobie H, Hamblen J, Samuelian J, Smith C. Mercury vapour (Hg(0)): Continuing toxicological uncertainties, and establishing a Canadian reference exposure level. Regul Toxicol Pharmicol. 2009; 53(1):32-38. Abstract available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273230008002304. Accessed April 18, 2019.
13. Stock A. [Zeitschrift fuer angewandte Chemie, 29. Jahrgang, 15. April 1926, Nr. 15, S. 461-466, Die Gefaehrlichkeit des Quecksilberdampfes, von Alfred Stock (1926).] The Dangerousness of Mercury Vapor. Translated by Birgit Calhoun.  Available from: http://www.stanford.edu/~bcalhoun/AStock.htm. Accessed December 22, 2015.
14. Vimy MJ, Lorscheider FL.  Intra-oral air mercury released from dental amalgam.  J Den Res. 1985; 64(8):1069-71.
15. Vimy MJ, Lorscheider FL:  Serial measurements of intra-oral air mercury; Estimation of daily dose from dental amalgam.  J Dent Res. 1985; 64(8):1072-5. Abstract available from: http://jdr.sagepub.com/content/64/8/1072.short. Accessed April 18, 2019.
16. Vimy MJ, Luft AJ, Lorscheider FL. Estimation of mercury body burden from dental amalgam computer simulation of a metabolic compartment model. Dent. Res. 1986; 65(12):1415-1419. Abstract available from: http://jdr.sagepub.com/content/65/12/1415.short.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
17. Aaseth J, Hilt B, Bjørklund G. Mercury exposure and health impacts in dental personnel. Environmental Research. 2018; 164:65-9. Abstract available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935118300847. Accessed March 20, 2019.
18. Al-Amodi HS, Zaghloul A, Alrefai AA, Adly HM. The hematological changes in dental staff: their relation to mercury vapor. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research & Allied Sciences. 2018; 7(2).
19. Al-Saleh I, Al-Sedairi A. Mercury (Hg) burden in children: The impact of dental amalgam. Sci Total Environ. 2011; 409(16):3003-3015. Abstract available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969711004359.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
20. Al-Zubaidi ES, Rabee AM. The risk of occupational exposure to mercury vapor in some public dental clinics of Baghdad city, Iraq. Inhalation Toxicology. 2017; 29(9):397-403. Abstract available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08958378.2017.1369601. Accessed March 20, 2019.
21. Ask K, Akesson A, Berglund M, Vahter M. Inorganic mercury and methylmercury in placentas of Swedish women. Environ Health Perspect. 2002; 110(5):523-6. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1240842/pdf/ehp0110-000523.pdf. Accessed April 18, 2019.
22. Bjørklund G, Hilt B, Dadar M, Lindh U, Aaseth J. Neurotoxic effects of mercury exposure in dental personnel. Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology. 2018: 1-7. Abstract available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/bcpt.13199. Accessed March 20, 2019.
23. de Oliveira MT, Pereira JR, Ghizoni JS, Bittencourt ST, Molina GO. Effects from exposure to dental amalgam on systemic mercury levels in patients and dental school students. Photomed Laser Surg. 2010; 28(S2): S-111. Abstract available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jefferson_Pereira/publication/47369541_Effects_from_exposure_
    to_dental_amalgam_on_systemic_mercury_levels_in_patients_and_dental_school_students.pdf Accessed April 18, 2019.
24. Fredin B. Mercury release from dental amalgam fillings. Int J Risk Saf Med.  1994; 4(3): 197-208. Abstract available from: http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/23511257.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
25. Galligan C, Sama S, Brouillette N. Occupational Exposure to Elemental Mercury in Odontology/Dentistry. Lowell, MA: University of Massachusetts; 2012. Available from: https://www.uml.edu/docs/Occupational%20Exposure%20to%20Elemental%20Mercury%20in%20
    Dentistry_tcm18-232339.pdf. Accessed March 20, 2019.
26. Goldschmidt PR, Cogan RB, Taubman SB. Effects of amalgam corrosion products on human cells. J Period Res. 1976; 11(2):108-15.  Abstract available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0765.1976.tb00058.x/abstract.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
27. Herber RF, de Gee AJ, Wibowo AA. Exposure of dentists and assistants to mercury: mercury levels in urine and hair related to conditions of practice. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1988; 16(3): 153-158. Abstract available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0528.1988.tb00564.x/abstract;jsessionid=0129EC1737083382DF5BA2DE8995F4FD.f03t04. Accessed April 18, 2019.
28. Karahalil B, Rahravi H, Ertas N. Examination of urinary mercury levels in dentists in Turkey. Hum Exp Toxicol.  2005; 24(8): 383-388. Abstract available from: http://het.sagepub.com/content/24/8/383.short.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
29. Kasraei S, Mortazavi H, Vahedi M, Vaziri PB, Assary MJ. Blood mercury level and its determinants among dental practitioners in Hamadan, Iran. Journal of Dentistry (Tehran, Iran). 2010;7(2):55. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3184749/. Accessed March 20, 2019.
30. Krausß P, Deyhle M, Maier KH, Roller E, Weiß HD, Clédon P. Field study on the mercury content of saliva. Toxicological & Environmental Chemistry. 1997; 63(1-4):29-46.  Abstract available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02772249709358515.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
31. Lönnroth EC, Shahnavaz H. Amalgam in dentistry. A survey of methods used at dental clinics in Norrbotten to decrease exposure to mercury vapour. Swed Dent J. 1995; 19(1-2): 55.  Abstract available from: http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/7597632.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
32. Martin MD, Naleway C, Chou HN. Factors contributing to mercury exposure in dentists. J Am Dent Assoc.1995; 126(11): 1502-1511. Abstract available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002817715607851.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
33. Molin M, Bergman B, Marklund SL, Schutz A, Skerfving S. Mercury, selenium, and glutathione peroxidase before and after amalgam removal in man. Acta Odontol Scand. 1990; 48(3): 189-202. Abstract available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/00016359009005875?journalCode=iode20.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
34. Mortada WL, Sobh MA, El-Defrawi, MM, Farahat SE. Mercury in dental restoration: is there a risk of nephrotoxity? J Nephrol. 2002; 15(2): 171-176. Abstract available from: http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/12018634. Accessed December 22, 2015.
35. Mutter J. Is dental amalgam safe for humans? The opinion of the scientific committee of the European Commission.  Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology. 2011; 6:2. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3025977/.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
36. Nimmo A, Werley MS, Martin JS, Tansy MF. Particulate inhalation during the removal of amalgam restorations. J Prosth Dent. 1990; 63(2):228-33. Abstract available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/002239139090110X. Accessed April 18, 2019.
37. Nourouzi E, Bahramifar N, Ghasempouri SM. Effect of teeth amalgam on mercury levels in the colostrums human milk in Lenjan. Environ Monit Assess. 2012: 184(1): 375-380. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Seyed_Mahmoud_Ghasempouri/publication/51052927_Effect_
    of_teeth_amalgam_on_mercury_levels_in_the_colostrums_human_milk_in_Lenjan/links/
    00463522eee955d586000000.pdf. Accessed April 18, 2019.
38. Parsell DE, Karns L, Buchanan WT, Johnson RB. Mercury release during autoclave sterilization of amalgam. J Dent Educ. 1996; 60(5): 453-458. Abstract available from: http://www.jdentaled.org/content/60/5/453.short.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
39. Redhe O, Pleva J. Recovery of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and from allergy after removal of dental amalgam fillings. Int J Risk & Safety in Med. 1994; 4(3): 229-236.  Available from:  https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jaro_Pleva/publication/235899060_Recovery_from_amyotrophic_
    lateral_sclerosis_and_from_allergy_after_removal_of_dental_amalgam_fillings/links/
    0fcfd513f4c3e10807000000.pdf. Accessed April 18, 2019.
40. Reinhardt JW. Side-effects: Mercury contribution to body burden from dental amalgam. Adv Dent Res. 1992; 6(1):110-3. Abstract available from: http://adr.sagepub.com/content/6/1/110.short.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
41. Richardson GM. Inhalation of mercury-contaminated particulate matter by dentists: an overlooked occupational risk. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment. 2003; 9(6): 1519-1531. Abstract available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10807030390251010.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
42. Snapp KR, Svare CW, Peterson LD. Contribution of dental amalgams to blood mercury levels. J Dent Res. 1981; 65(5):311, Abstract #1276, Special issue.
43. Vahter M, Akesson A, Lind B, Bjors U, Schutz A, Berglund M. Longitudinal study of methylmercury and inorganic mercury in blood and urine of pregnant and lactating women, as well as in umbilical cord blood. Environ Res. 2000; 84(2):186-94. Abstract available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935100940982.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
44. Votaw AL, Zey J. Vacuuming a mercury-contaminated dental office may be hazardous to your health. Dent Assist. 1991; 60(1): 27.  Abstract available from: http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/1860523.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
45. Warwick D, Young M, Palmer J, Ermel RW. Mercury vapor volatilization from particulate generated from dental amalgam removal with a high-speed dental drill – a significant source of exposure. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology. 2019. Available from: https://occup-med.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12995-019-0240-2.  Accessed July 19, 2019.
46. Warwick R, O Connor A, Lamey B. Mercury vapour exposure during dental student training in amalgam removal. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology. 2013; 8(1):27. 2015. Available from: https://occup-med.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1745-6673-8-27. Accessed March 21, 2019.
47. Weiner JA, Nylander M, Berglund F. Does mercury from amalgam restorations constitute a health hazard? Sci Total Environ. 1990; 99(1-2):1-22.  Abstract available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/004896979090206A.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
48. Zahir F, Rizwi SJ, Haq SK, Khan RH. Low dose mercury toxicity and human health. Environ Toxicol Pharmacol. 2005; 20(2): 351-360.  Abstract available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21783611.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
49. Abraham JE, Svare CW, Frank CW. The effect of dental amalgam restorations on blood mercury levels. J Dent Res. 1984; 63(1):71-3. Abstract available from: http://jdr.sagepub.com/content/63/1/71.short. Accessed April 18, 2019.
50. Björkman L, Lind B. Factors influencing mercury evaporation rate from dental amalgam fillings. Scand J Dent Res. 1992; 100(6):354–60. Abstract available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0722.1992.tb01086.x/abstract. Accessed April 18, 2019.
51. Dunn JE, Trachtenberg FL, Barregard L, Bellinger D, McKinlay S. Scalp hair and urine mercury content of children in the Northeast United States: the New England Children’s Amalgam Trial. Environmental Research. 2008; 107(1):79-88. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2464356/.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
52. Isacsson G, Barregård L, Seldén A, Bodin L. Impact of nocturnal bruxism on mercury uptake from dental amalgams. European Journal of Oral Sciences. 1997; 105(3):251-7. Abstract available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0722.1997.tb00208.x/abstract.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
53. Sällsten G, Thoren J, Barregård L, Schütz A, Skarping G. Long-term use of nicotine chewing gum and mercury exposure from dental amalgam fillings. Journal of Dental Research. 1996; 75(1):594-8. Abstract available from: http://jdr.sagepub.com/content/75/1/594.short.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
54. Svare CW, Peterson LC, Reinhardt JW, Boyer DB, Frank CW, Gay DD, et al. The effect of dental amalgams on mercury levels in expired air. J Dent Res. 1981; 60:1668–71. Abstract available from: http://jdr.sagepub.com/content/60/9/1668.short.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
55. Gioda A, Hanke G, Elias-Boneta A, Jiménez-Velez B. A pilot study to determine mercury exposure through vapor and bound to PM10 in a dental school environment. Toxicology and Industrial Health. 2007; 23(2):103-13. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Braulio_Jimenez-Velez/publication/5647180_A_pilot_study_to_determine_mercury_exposure_through_vapor_and_bound_
    to_PM10_in_a_dental_school_environment/links/56d9a95308aebabdb40f7bd3/A-pilot-study-to-determine-
    mercury-exposure-through-vapor-and-bound-to-PM10-in-a-dental-school-environment.pdf. Accessed March 20, 2019.
56. Gul N, Khan S, Khan A, Nawab J, Shamshad I, Yu X. Quantification of Hg excretion and distribution in biological samples of mercury-dental-amalgam users and its correlation with biological variables. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2016; 23(20):20580-90. Abstract available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-016-7266-0. Accessed March 20, 2019.
57. Lönnroth EC, Shahnavaz H. Dental clinics–a burden to environment?  Swed Dent J. 1996; 20(5):173. Abstract available from: http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/9000326.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
58. Manceau, A., Enescu, M., Simionovici, A., Lanson, M., Gonzalez-Rey, M., Rovezzi, M., Tucoulou, R., Glatzel, P., Nagy, K.L. and Bourdineaud, J.P. Chemical forms of mercury in human hair reveal sources of exposure. Environmental Science & Technology. 2016; 50(19): 10721-10729. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jean_Paul_Bourdineaud/publication/308418704_Chemical_Forms_
    of_Mercury_in_Human_Hair_Reveal_Sources_of_Exposure/links/5b8e3d9ba6fdcc1ddd0a85f9/Chemical-
    Forms-of-Mercury-in-Human-Hair-Reveal-Sources-of-Exposure.pdf. Accessed March 20, 2019.
59. Oliveira MT, Constantino HV, Molina GO, Milioli E, Ghizoni JS, Pereira JR. Evaluation of mercury contamination in patients and water during amalgam removal. The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2014; 15(2):165. Abstract available from: https://europepmc.org/abstract/med/25095837. Accessed April 18, 2019.
60. Sandborgh-Englund G, Elinder CG, Langworth S, Schutz A, Ekstrand J. Mercury in biological fluids after amalgam removal. J Dent Res. 1998; 77(4):615-24. Abstract available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gunilla_Sandborgh-Englund/publication/51331635_Mercury_in_biological_fluids_after_amalgam_removal/links/
    0fcfd50d1ea80e1d3a000000.pdf. Accessed April 18, 2019.
61. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Dental effluent guidelines. Available from: https://www.epa.gov/eg/dental-effluent-guidelines. Last updated December 1, 2017. Accessed March 14, 2019.
62. Adegbembo AO, Watson PA, Lugowski SJ. The weight of wastes generated by removal of dental amalgam restorations and the concentration of mercury in dental wastewater. Journal-Canadian Dental Association. 2002; 68(9):553-8. Available from: http://cda-adc.ca/jadc/vol-68/issue-9/553.pdf. Accessed April 18, 2019.
63. al-Shraideh M, al-Wahadni A, Khasawneh S, al-Shraideh MJ. The mercury burden in waste water released from dental clinics. SADJ: Journal of the South African Dental Association (Tydskrif van die Suid-Afrikaanse Tandheelkundige Vereniging). 2002; 57(6):213-5. Abstract available from: https://europepmc.org/abstract/med/12229075. Accessed April 18, 2019.
64. Alothmani O. Air quality in the endodontist’s dental surgery. New Zealand Endodontic Journal. 2009; 39: 12. Available at: http://www.nzse.org.nz/docs/Vol.%2039%20January%202009.pdf. Accessed April 18, 2019.
65. Arenholt-Bindslev D. Dental amalgam—environmental aspects. Advances in Dental Research. 1992; 6(1):125-30. Abstract available from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/08959374920060010501. Accessed April 18, 2019.
66. Arenholt-Bindslev D, Larsen AH. Mercury levels and discharge in waste water from dental clinics. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution. 1996; 86(1-4):93-9. Abstract available at: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00279147. Accessed April 18, 2019.
67. Batchu H, Rakowski D, Fan PL, Meyer DM. Evaluating amalgam separators using an international standard. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2006; 137(7):999-1005. Abstract available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002817714649278. Accessed April 18, 2019.
68. Chou HN, Anglen J. An evaluation of amalgam separators. ADA Professional Product Review. 2012; 7(2): 2-7.
69. Fan PL, Batchu H, Chou HN, Gasparac W, Sandrik J, Meyer DM. Laboratory evaluation of amalgam separators. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2002; 133(5):577-89. Abstract available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002817714629718. Accessed April 18, 2019.
70. Hylander LD, Lindvall A, Uhrberg R, Gahnberg L, Lindh U. Mercury recovery in situ of four different dental amalgam separators. Science of the Total Environment. 2006; 366(1):320-36. Abstract available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969705004961. Accessed April 18, 2019.
71. Khwaja MA, Nawaz S, Ali SW. Mercury exposure in the work place and human health: dental amalgam use in dentistry at dental teaching institutions and private dental clinics in selected cities of Pakistan. Reviews on Environmental Health. Abstract available from: https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/reveh.2016.31.issue-1/reveh-2015-0058/reveh-2015-0058.xml. Accessed April 18, 2019.
72. Stone ME, Cohen ME, Berry DL, Ragain JC. Design and evaluation of a filter-based chairside amalgam separation system. Science of the Total Environment. 2008; 396(1):28-33. Abstract available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969708001940. Accessed April 18, 2019.
73. Vandeven J, McGinnis S. An assessment of mercury in the form of amalgam in dental wastewater in the United States. Water, Air and Soil Pollution. 2005; 164: 349-366. DCN 0469. Abstract available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11270-005-4008-1.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
74. Directorate of Health [Oslo, Norway]. Nasjonale faglige retningslinjer for utredning og behandling ved mistanke om bivirkninger fra odontologiske biomaterialer [National guidelines for assessment and treatment for suspected adverse effects from dental biomaterials]. Oslo: Hesedirektoratet, avdeling omsorg og Tannhelse. November 2008. Available from: https://helsedirektoratet.no/Lists/Publikasjoner/Attachments/488/
    Nasjonal-faglig-retningslinje-om-bivirkninger-fra-odontologiske-biomaterialer-IS-1481.pdf. Accessed March 15, 2019.
75. Huggins HA, Levy TE. Cerebrospinal fluid protein changes in multiple sclerosis after dental amalgam removal. Alternative Medicine Review. 1998; 3:295-300.
76. Reinhardt JW, Chan KC, Schulein TM. Mercury vaporization during amalgam removal. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1983; 50(1):62-4. Abstract available from: https://www.thejpd.org/article/0022-3913(83)90167-1/pdf. Accessed April 18, 2019.
77. Cabaña-Muñoz ME, Parmigiani-Izquierdo JM, Parmigiani-Cabaña JM, Merino JJ. Safe removal of amalgam fillings in dental clinic: use of synergic nasal filters (active carbon) and phytonaturals. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR). 2015; 4(3): 2393. Available at: http://www.ijsr.net/archive/v4i3/SUB152554.pdf. Accessed April 18, 2019.
78. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Mercury Quick Facts. Cleaning up spills in your house. February 2009. Available at: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mercury/docs/Residential_Hg_Spill_Cleanup.pdf. Accessed April 18, 2019.
79. Merfield DP, Taylor A, Gemmell DM, Parrish JA. Mercury intoxication in a dental surgery following unreported spillage. British Dental Journal. 1976; 141(6):179.
80. Colson DG. A safe protocol for amalgam removal. Journal of Environmental and Public Health; Page 2. doi:10.1155/2012/517391. Available at: http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/jeph/2012/517391.pdf. Accessed April 18, 2019.
81. Mercola J, Klinghardt D. Mercury toxicity and systemic elimination agents. Journal of Nutritional & Environmental Medicine. 2001;11(1):53-62. Available from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/957a/c002e59df5e69605c3d2126cc53ce84f063b.pdf. Accessed March 20, 2019.
82. LBNL (Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory). Pick The Right Gloves for The Chemicals You Handle. Berkley, CA: Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory, US Department of Energy. Undated. Available at: http://amo-csd.lbl.gov/downloads/Chemical%20Resistance%20of%20Gloves.pdf. Accessed April 18, 2019.
83. Rego A, Roley L. In-use barrier integrity of gloves: latex and nitrile superior to vinyl. American Journal of Infection Control. 1999; 27(5):405-10. Abstract available at: http://www.ajicjournal.org/article/S0196-6553(99)70006-4/fulltext?refuid=S1538-5442(01)70020-X&refissn=
    0045-9380&mobileUi=0.  Accessed April 18, 2019.
84. Berglund A, Molin M. Mercury levels in plasma and urine after removal of all amalgam restorations: the effect of using rubber dams. Dental Materials. 1997; 13(5):297-304. Abstract available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9823089. Accessed April 19, 2019.
85. Halbach S, Kremers L, Willruth H, Mehl A, Welzl G, Wack FX, Hickel R, Greim H. Systemic transfer of mercury from amalgam fillings before and after cessation of emission. Environmental Research. 1998; 77(2):115-23. Abstract available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935198938294. Accessed April 19, 2019.
86. Reinhardt JW, Boyer DB, Svare CW, Frank CW, Cox RD, Gay DD. Exhaled mercury following removal and insertion of amalgam restorations. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1983;49(5):652-6. Abstract available from: https://www.thejpd.org/article/0022-3913(83)90391-8/pdf. Accessed April 19, 2019.
87. Stejskal V, Hudecek R, Stejskal J, Sterzl I. Diagnosis and treatment of metal-induced side-effects. Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2006 Dec;27(Suppl 1):7-16. Available from http://www.melisa.org/pdf/Metal-induced-side-effects.pdf. Accessed April 19, 2019.
88. Erdinger L., Rezvani P., Hammes F., Sonntag HG. Improving indoor air quality in hospital environments and dental practices with modular stand-alone air cleaning devices.  Research Report of the Institute of Hygiene, University of Heidelberg, Germany published during the proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate Indoor Air 99 in Edinburgh, Scotland, August 1999. Available from: https://www.iqair.com/sites/default/files/pdf/Research-Report-Improving-Indoor-Air-Quality-in-Dental-Practices_v2.pdf.  Accessed April 19, 2019.
89. Brune D, Hensten‐Pettersen AR, Beltesbrekke H. Exposure to mercury and silver during removal of amalgam restorations. European Journal of Oral Sciences. 1980; 88(5):460-3. Abstract available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1600-0722.1980.tb01254.x. Accessed April 19, 2019.
90. Pleva J. Mercury from dental amalgams: exposure and effects. International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine. 1992; 3(1):1-22. Abstract available from: https://content.iospress.com/articles/international-journal-of-risk-and-safety-in-medicine/jrs3-1-01. Accessed April 19, 2019.
91. Richards JM, Warren PJ. Mercury vapour released during the removal of old amalgam restorations. British Dental Journal. 1985; 159(7):231.