The Assessment of Mercury Released from Dental Amalgams after Exposure to Wi-Fi and X-Ray Radiation in Artificial Saliva
More details
Hide details
Ionizing and Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection Research Center (INIRPRC), Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, IRAN
Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, IRAN
M.Sc. in Radiobiology and Protection, Paramedical School, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, IRAN
School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, IRAN
Department of Biostatistics, School of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, IRAN
Online publish date: 2018-01-26
Publish date: 2018-01-26
Eurasian J Anal Chem 2018;13(2):em08
Mercury is a well-known toxic element that is found in various forms in nature. Recently, dental amalgams have been recognized as a new source of mercury. This study was carried out under in vitro condition; the amount of mercury released from teeth restored with amalgams in the presence of Wi-Fi router radiation (non-ionizing radiation) and X-ray (ionizing radiation) using a protocol similar to Computed Tomography of Para-nasal Sinuses (CT) were analyzed separately, and in combination on the samples. For this reason, 50 human premolars were restored with a certain type of commercial amalgams. The samples were divided into five groups; control, only-CT, CT+Wi-Fi, Wi-Fi+CT and only-Wi-Fi groups, and mercury measurement were investigated at 24 and 48 hours after exposure to radiation by cold-vapor atomic absorption system. The results showed a significant difference between subgroups 24 and 48 h (p-values = 0.001 and 0.008). However, over time a significant difference was only found in CT+Wi-Fi group (p-value = 0.043). In addition, in comparison with the control group, only the subgroup that was exposed to Wi-Fi waves showed a significant difference after 24 hours (p = 0.033). In line with some of the previous studies, our findings showed that electromagnetic waves are involved in mercury release process, and warnings about the consequences of electromagnetic waves on mercury release and subtitling it with a new compound in restorative dentistry should be taken into consideration.
1. Nayman A, Odev K. Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism by 64-Detector MDCT Combined with Doppler Ultrasonography and Indirect CTV of The Leg: A Different Protocol. European Journal of General Medicine. 2013;10(1):7-13.
2. Sass BM, Salem MA, Smith LA. Mercury usage and alternatives in the electrical and electronics industries. Battelle, Columbus, OH (United States). Final Report. 1994;EPA/60O/R-94/047.
3. Bates JF, Knapton AG. Metals and alloys in dentistry. Int Met Rev. 1997;22(1):39-60.
4. American Dental Association (ADA) Council on Scientific Affairs, Statement on dental amalgam. Available from:
5. Bharti R, Wadhwani KK, Tikku AP, Chandra A. Dental amalgam: An update. Journal of conservative dentistry: JCD. 2010);13(4):204-212.
6. Kunt H, Dayıoğlu H. The Effects of Radiation on Bone Mineral Density of Radiology Workers Depending on The Device They Use. European Journal of General Medicine. 2011;8(4):318-322.
7. World health organization, Exposure to mercury: A major public health concern. WHO, Public Health and Environment 2007. Available from:
8. Thompson CM, Markesbery WR, Ehmann WD, Mao YX, Vance DE. Regional brain trace-element studies in Alzheimer's disease. Neurotoxicology. 1988;9(1):1-7.
9. Clarkson TW. The three modern faces of mercury. Environ Health Perspect, 110 (Suppl 1). 2002:11-23.
10. Houston MC. Role of mercury toxicity in hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and stroke. J Clin Hypertens. 2011;13(8):621-627.
11. Koos BJ, Longo LD. Mercury toxicity in the pregnant woman, fetus, and newborn infant: a review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1976;126(3), 390-409.
12. Oskarsson A, Schütz A, Skerfving S, Hallén IP, Ohlin B, Lagerkvist BJ. Total and inorganic mercury in breast milk and blood in relation to fish consumption and amalgam fillings in lactating women. Arch Environ Health. 1996;51(3):234-241.
13. Björnberg KA, Vahter M, Petersson-Grawe K, Glynn A, Cnattingius S, Darnerud PO, Atuma S, Aune M, Becker W, Berglund M. Methyl mercury and inorganic mercury in Swedish pregnant women and in cord blood: influence of fish consumption. Environ Health Perspect. 2003;111(4):637-641.
14. Kim, KH, Kabir E, Jahan SA. A review on the distribution of Hg in the environment and its human health impacts. J Hazard Mater. 2016;306:376-385.
15. Kunt H, Dayıoğlu H, Çaycı MK, Korkmaz M. The Assessment as Bone Mineral Density of Bone Damage in Radiology Workers Occupationally Exposed to Ionizing Radiation. European Journal of General Medicine. 2013;10(4):214-218.
16. Mutter J. Is dental amalgam safe for humans? The opinion of the scientific committee of the European Commission. J Occup Med Toxicol. 2011;6(1):2-10.
17. Öktem ZB, Songür E, Öz FT. Dental Treatment of a Xeroderma Pigmentosum Patient under Deep Sedation. European Journal of General Medicine. 2012;9(1):149-151.
18. Belyaev I. Non-thermal biological effects of microwaves. Microwave Review. 2005;11(2):13-29.
19. Donya M, Radford M, ElGuindy A, Firmin D, Yacoub MH. Radiation in medicine: Origins, risks and aspirations. Glob Cardiol Sci Pract. 2015;4:437-48.
20. Örtendahl TW, Holland RI, Röckert H. Studies in oral galvanism: mercury and copper levels in urine, blood and saliva in submerged electrically cutting divers. J Oral Rehabil. 1989;16(6):559-573.
21. Berglund A, Bergdahl J, Hansson MK. Influence of low frequency magnetic fields on the intra-oral release of mercury vapor from amalgam restorations. Eur J Oral Sci. 1998;106(2 Pt 1):671-674.
22. Mortazavi SM, Daiee E, Yazdi A, Khiabani K, Kavousi A, Vazirinejad R, Behnejad B, Ghasemi M, Mood MB. Mercury release from dental amalgam restorations after magnetic resonance imaging and following mobile phone use. Pak J Biol Sci. 2008;11(8):1142-1146.
23. Shahidi SH, Bronoosh P, Alavi AA, Zamiri B, Sadeghi AR, Bagheri MH, Javadpour S. Effect of magnetic resonance imaging on microleakage of amalgam restorations: an in vitro study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009;38(7):470-474.
24. Mortazavi SM, Neghab M, Anoosheh SM, Bahaeddini N, Mortazavi G, Neghab P, Rajaeifard A. (2014). High-field MRI and mercury release from dental amalgam fillings. Int J Occup Environ Med. 2009;5(2):316-101.
25. Kursun S, Öztas B, Atas H, Tastekin M. Effects of X-rays and magnetic resonance imaging on mercury release from dental amalgam into artificial saliva. Oral Radiology. 2014;30(2):142-6.
26. Mortazavi SM, Mortazavi G. Effects of X-rays and magnetic resonance imaging on mercury release from dental amalgam into artificial saliva. Oral radiology. 2015;31(3):199-200.
27. Paknahad M, Mortazavi SM, Shahidi S, Mortazavi G, Haghani M. Effect of radiofrequency radiation from Wi-Fi devices on mercury release from amalgam restorations. J Environ Health Sci Eng. 2016;14(1):12-30.
28. Cheng DK. Field and wave electromagnetics. Pearson Education India; 2nd ed., Addison-Wesley; 1989.
29. Ismail HC, Biswal BM. Fatigue in cancer patients treated by external radiotherapy. European Journal of General Medicine. 2004;1(1): 9-13.
30. Jeong DK, Lee SC, Huh KH, Yi WJ, Heo MS, Lee SS, Choi SC. Comparison of effective dose for imaging of mandible between multi-detector CT and cone-beam CT. Imaging Sci Dent. 2012;42(2):65-70.
31. Ali MAA. Evaluation of radiation dose in facial bones and paranasal sinuses examination using computed tomography. 2013. Available from INIS:
32. McGuire T. Chronic mercury poisoning and mercury detoxification. Townsend Letter: The Examiner of Alternative Medicine. 2007;287:96-106.
33. Mortazavi G, Mortazavi SA, Mehdizadeh AR. “Triple M” Effect: A Proposed Mechanism to Explain Increased Dental Amalgam Microleakage after Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation. JBPE. 2016.