A coalition of public interest groups sued the American Dental Association and the California Dental Association on June 12, 2001, claiming they have misled the public about the dangers of mercury in tooth fillings.

The lawsuits, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, are the latest salvo in a growing battle over mercury fillings, which opponents say can poison the body with leaking vapors possibly linked to Alzheimer's disease and other neurological problems, especially in children and unborn babies.

The dental associations insist that mercury is safe when mixed with other metals and implanted in teeth and that studies have failed to demonstrate that the low level vapors are dangerous.

The lawsuits allege violations of California's business and professions code and charge that the ADA and the CDA have issued rules preventing dentists from discussing the dangers of mercury with patients.

"The worst thing they are doing is hiding the presence of mercury in fillings -- which they call silver amalgam -- and trying to keep dentists from saying the 'M' word and keep consumers from hearing the 'M' word,'' plaintiffs' attorney Charles Brown said. "These fillings are 50 percent mercury.''

Brown filed the lawsuits on behalf of Kids Against Pollution, Dental Amalgam Mercury Syndrome Inc., American Academy of Biological Dentistry and a group of patients who believe that mercury in fillings has made them ill.

"We consider it to be safe and the science certainly indicates that it is,'' CDA explaining the risks of any procedure to patients.

Fred Peterson, a spokesman for the ADA, said he could not discuss the lawsuit but issued a prepared statement from the organization on tooth fillings.

"Dental amalgam (silver filling) is considered a safe, affordable and durable material that has been used to restore the teeth of more than 100 million Americans,'' the statement said. ``It contains a mixture of metals such as silver, copper and tin in addition to mercury which chemically binds these components into a hard, stable and safe substance.''

The plaintiffs seek civil penalties and ask the court to stop the ADA and the CDA from putting out "false, misleading and inaccurate information'' about fillings and stop referring to them as "silver'' when they have equal parts mercury.

The National Institutes of Health are conducting clinical trials into the effects of mercury fillings in children. Other studies on mercury in fillings have been inconclusive.

Similar lawsuits have been filed in federal court in Maryland by dentists and patients, while state legislatures in New York and Maine are considering bills that would require dentists to disclose to patients the makeup of their fillings.

Yahoo News

State Officials Threaten To Dissolve Dental Board

State officials threatened to dissolve the California Dental Board on June 14 as the battle over the use of mercury in dental fillings heated up.

The 12-member board canceled a scheduled meeting Thursday, set up to consider a revised fact sheet on various materials, including mercury, used in fillings. The Los Angeles session was scrubbed for lack of a quorum.

That enraged activists, who want patients to know that silver fillings are about 50 percent mercury by weight.

It also antagonized state officials, who claimed the board dragged its feet in updating the fact sheet.

The sheet, mandated by a 1992 law but never implemented to the satisfaction of state officials, is designed for use by dentists in patient discussions. It describes various materials used in fillings, including amalgam, porcelain and resin.

"We are very displeased," said Lynn Morris, a deputy director of the Department of Consumers Affairs, who convened Thursday's meeting without the dental board.

"The members of the board do not understand the gravity of this situation."

The dental board plans to sign off on the fact sheet during a meeting scheduled for July 19, or more than 18 months after it began the task. Kit Neacy, the board's president, said the panel had promised to complete the task by the end of the fiscal year, or June 30.

But the board may never take up the issue -- much less meet -- again. State Sen. Liz Figueroa, D-Fremont, said she intends to introduce legislation on Monday that would yank the panel's funding effective July 1.

Attorneys within the Department of Consumer Affairs are looking at what actions it can take against the board. Options include supporting a separate Figueroa that would gut the board.

Charles Brown, a Washington, D.C., attorney who sued the American and California dental associations on June 12, 2001, in part to force disclosure of the mercury content of silver fillings, said it was unclear how the feud would turn out.

Associated Press June 15, 2001

Late Breaking News

With the Assembly Committee on Health vote of 11 to 0 in favor of disbanding the Dental Board of California because of its refusal to comply with mandates associated with Mercury amalgams, the Bill (SB26) is forwarded for hearing on June 27 in the Assembly Appropriations Committee for what appears to be certain passage. The Senate has already passed SB26 (27-10). The bill can be tracked by searching for "Senate" and "SB26"