Hi Ray,

Quote
I suppose the question is how much mercury remains in the pulp and for how long. I would presume that this would exit the body fairly rapidly through the blood stream and that any mercury hiding in dentinal tubules would be much more of a problem (as it could get stuck in the tubules which I beleive can be 3 miles long they are so microscopic).


That's a good point. It would be interesting to see how much mercury remains in various parts of the tooth months after the filling has been removed. Anyone want to volunteer a tooth? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

But seriously, this is where some really useful research could be conducted.

Quote
Also does that mean that if you can a tooth extracted or a root canal undertaken that the pulp would be removed and with it the mercury?


I think if the entire tooth was removed you would get rid of most of the mercury, although I've read that there can also be significant concentrations in the jaw bone. It would be interesting to hear from people who have had their teeth pulled instead of having their fillings replaced.

Quote
Dr El-Essawy's information is extremely helpful. From what I can gather, if mercury does still reside in the pulp then this can be easily chelated once all mercury is removed from the teeth.


I guess "easily chelated" is the real issue. The problem seems to be handling any form of chelation and from my calculations even when I chelated at the highest level using NDF it could still take many years.

Something worth noting about Dr. El-Essawy's chelation protocol is that it includes colonics and daily saunas which may allow the patient to handle the chelation process.