Martha:
>If gold attracts the remaining mercury fragments to itself, wouldn't
>this be a *good* thing?  As this would hinder the escape of the mercury
>into other parts of the body?  I'm not understanding.

Not a good thing. Reason: if the heavy metals are stored in a region
where they hinder cells/organs from functioning this goes on until in-
finity. And if this region is the brain... (see Ellie's posts.)

Martha:
>Also, if gold is not a good idea, what would be the best alternative?

Gold is quite good. But applying it after amalgam without a chemical
detox of the amalgam is bad. That's the problem.
If you thouroughly detox your amalgam (lasts long - mostly over a year)
before you apply gold, it'll be ok.

Alternatives are discussed in my local instincto group. Very very
difficult. At least you should be tested if you are allergic against
the new material. Important!
And I (from my bad experience with the metals of amalgam) wouldn't
choose any new material that contains metals. Most ceramics contain
aluminum. Hm. Sounds bad (for me.) Also gold is never 100% gold. Would
be much too soft. It's always gold together with other metals.
No general solution here.

Best dental wishes,

Stefan

E-Mail: Stefan Joest <[log in to unmask]>