The Bad history
The American Dental Association (ADA) grew out of the dental amalgam wars of the 1830’s. In these wars two groups of dentists slugged it out between the merits of different dental fillings: one side favored noble metal fillings (gold and silver) and the other, mercury amalgams. The group that favored mercury amalgams went on to form an organization which later became the ADA. Since that time -for over 160 years - the ADA has promoted mercury amalgams as “safe and effective.” They didn’t just promote this line, but made life an absolute misery for any dentist who uttered a negative word about the safety of these fillings. Until recently, in many states if a dentist told a patient that mercury amalgams caused a health problem they could have their license yanked from them. Dentists were only allowed to remove mercury amalgams for “mechanical failure” not for health concerns.
Over recent years concerns about mercury poisoning from all sources has been growing: a) organic mercury contamination of fish, b) the use of organic mercury (thimerosal) as a preservative in vaccines and c) mercury from dental amalgams. The concerns have been largely hidden from the public by using the words “silver fillings” for mercury amalgams. Most people have been unaware that these “silver” fillings contain little or no silver but about 50% mercury.
For many years, ADA spokespersons have claimed that once the mercury was set in the amalgam it was absolutely fixed and none would be lost to the body. Now many scientific studies have shown this to be false. Not only can mercury leave the amalgam (especially during chewing and the consumption of hot foods and beverages) but it can enter the brain via the olfactory nerve. Animal studies which have inserted mercury amalgams into sheep and monkeys have shown that the mercury not only leaves the amalgam but shows up in every organ of the body, including the brain.
Confronted with this scientific evidence ADA officials either claimed that they were unaware of these studies or criticized their methodology. Just like their promotion of fluoridation they repeated the mantra that literally “thousands of studies show that mercury amalgams are absolutely safe and effective.” That despite their use for over 100 years, there was no evidence of harm. Their only concession was that their might be a small minority of people who are “allergic” to mercury.
But again just like fluoridation, this wasn’t just a case of battling over science, the ADA has had friends in government to help them prevail by via other means. In particular, the FDA has hitherto provided huge protection for the ADA’s claims, just as the CDC Oral Health Division provides cover to the ADA on their claims of fluoridation’s safety.
Honest dentists fight back
Fortunately, for the health of our citizens, a number of dentists – a number, which grows larger by the day – has fought back. In particular, the formation of the International Academy for Oral Medicine and Health (IAOMT) has enabled the publication of honest studies on this matter; allowed, through regular conferences, the sharing of accurate scientific findings to their members and helped to raise money to hire legal help to protect dentists who refuse to use mercury amalgams from harassment and losing their licenses. Other groups have also got involved including DAMS, organized by the victims of mercury amalgam poisoning. In some cases, the effects mimic the symptoms of MLS and other neurological diseases. These efforts have also recently been buttressed by other groups of mercury poisoned victims, especially the parents of children who had multiple injections of vaccines containing thimerosal. These brought with them some powerful friends in Congress like Representative Dan Burton.
In the midst of all this fight against mercury poisoning there are many strong leaders. The one I have heard from most is the lawyer Charlie Brown (National Counsel, Consumers for Dental Choice). His last email sent out on June 24 (see below) is extremely exciting and hopeful. I have always believed that when mercury amalgams fall, the ADA’s twin evil - fluoridation - will fall soon after.
Where can we find a lawyer like Charlie Brown to mastermind the overthrow of fluoridation in the same way that he and others appear to be overthrowing mercury amalgams? Just as the opponents of mercury amalgams have appeared to have driven a wedge between the ADA and their friends at the FDA, we have to drive a wedge between the ADA and their friends at the Oral Health Division of the CDC.
Meanwhile, it is very exciting to see the influence of the ADA crumbling on mercury amalgams.
What are you doing next Charlie?
-----------------------------------------------
Charlie Brown’s June 24 email
FDA Abandons Pro-Mercury Fillings Policy -- Will Propose New Rule
An intense set of interactions with FDA since the Court of Appeals opinion on April 13 has borne fruit. On April 19, we advised FDA of liability exposure of key staff, then on May 2 notified FDA lawyers that we had the papers prepared to file another lawsuit unless FDA wanted to meet. On May 10, top FDA officials met with food and drug law expert Jim Turner and me; we gave FDA a month to change course -- else we would return to court.
FDA responded -- favorably. Hemmed in by its own scientific panel, facing another lawsuit from us, challenged by an increasingly aroused public, and unable to justify a policy that this mercury is somehow different from the mercury in medicines for dogs or fish for humans, FDA changed course. On June 14, FDA’s lawyer notified me, by phone and in writing (e-mail is below) that FDA will write an entirely new regulation on mercury fillings. It is the harbinger of hope we may have been seeking from this powerful agency.
Here’s what it means:
1) The great news: FDA abandons its policy (expressed in its proposed regulation of 2002) to write into law a sleazy special-interest rule prohibiting warnings, covering up the existence of mercury, and maintaining mercury exposure’s side effect is “allergies.” After a five-year battle, we broke the A.D.A.’s stranglehold over FDA policy.
2) The bad news: Today, and tomorrow, the ugly status quo remains. Dentists deceive parents by calling the fillings silver. Toxic mercury fillings are still the choice of the assembly-line dentists working on our soldiers, our youth, our minorities, and our working poor. FDA gives no timetable to propose its new regulation.
3) The mystery: With an in-house fight apparently going on between FDA reformers and FDA’s mercury protectors, the result is not predictable. But at last, top officials are listening to our side -- Professor Boyd Haley, Dr. Rich Fischer, and Dr. Mike Fleming met June 22 with FDA’s Associate Commissioner for Science. I have written FDA six questions about legally required steps.
We haven’t won – far from it. But truly, the A.D.A. has lost. FDA is no longer dancing to its tune. The issue of mercury toxicity from amalgam will be the subject of a great national debate -- the news the A.D.A. and the pro-mercury dentists have long dreaded.
Let me not sugar-coat it: a major battle lies ahead as FDA determines its policy, and perhaps at FDA’s typical glacial speed. We must vigilantly advocate our cause -- inside the agency, before the public, and if necessary back to the courts. I welcome your views about our next step. Grassroots activism by consumers, and speaking out by dentists and other health professionals, is more important than ever.
Charlie Brown
PS--Check our website, http://www.toxicteeth.org/ , for updates on FDA.
Charles G. Brown, National Counsel
Consumers for Dental Choice
NOTE OUR NEW ADDRESS as of 6/27/07:
316 F St., N.E., Suite 212
Washington, DC 20002
ph 202.246-7642
E-mail from FDA’s lawyer to Brown
From: Vicente, Wendy [mailto:Wendy.Vicente@fda.hhs.gov]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 2:09 PM
To: Charlie Brown
Subject: RE: Legal and Policy Reasons to Exit Mercury Fillings
Mr. Brown, as you requested, I am writing to memorialize our conversation today. I called you to let you know that the agency intends to issue an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking regarding the classification of dental amalgam. I also told you that the agency cannot commit to a specific date certain when this will issue.
Wendy S. Vicente
Food & Drug Division, OGC
Wendy.Vicente@fda.hhs.gov
301-827-7138
301-827-7145 (facsimile)