|
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"
| 