The following email was from Charles Brown who is from the National Counsel, Consumers for Dental Choice and is the President of the World Alliance for Mercury-Free Dentistry.

“The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted a resolution on 27 May 2011 urging its 47 member countries to start “restricting or prohibiting the use of amalgams as dental fillings.”

Deputy Jean Huss, Luxembourg’s representative to the Council of Europe (not to be confused with the European Union), drafted the meticulously researched report that explains two major reasons behind this call to action:

Amalgam is a health threat: “…amalgams are the prime source of exposure to mercury for developed countries, also affecting embryos, foetuses (through the placenta) and children (through breastfeeding). Exposure to mercury can seriously affect the health of patients and dental professionals…”

Amalgam is an environmental threat: “…between 60 and 90 tonnes of mercury from dental surgeries are released into and contaminate Europe’s atmosphere, surface waters and soil every year.”
The Council of Europe’s ground-breaking resolution will have a favorable impact on the ongoing mercury treaty negotiations. With this resolution, the Council of Europe joins the growing international call for the amalgam phase-out that is already endorsed by the African region, the Arab League, and the United States government. (The Council of Europe’s report observed that the U.S. position itself is “likely to change the global debate on amalgams.”)”

Exciting news!! In its AAMET Life Magazine Summer 2011 Edition, the  Association of  Advancement of Meridian Energy Techniques (AAMET) features an article entitled “Dental Fears: How EFT Can Relieve Dental Patients’ Fear.” It is a wonderful summation of the work that EFT master Andy Bryce and I have done using EFT to reduce the issues of dental fears and phobias that are so prevalent in our society. The following link takes you to the magazine. The article appears on page 24.

http://content.yudu.com/Library/A1sfzf/AAMETLIFEMagazineSum/resources/index.htm?referrerUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.yudu.com%2Fitem%2Fdetails%2F342011%2FAAMET-LIFE-Magazine—Summer-2011

It is well known that the fear of dentists and/or dental procedures is a major factor in why many people avoid going for regular dental care.

In many cases, they may only go during an emergency and may require pre-medication for those emergencies or for some, even may require drugs for routine dental care.

The result can be detrimental to the person, not only in the possibility of them having more severe dental problems, but also escalating the negative emotions around their issues.

In this 3-set DVD series called Freedom From Dental Fears, Spirit Coach and EFT Master practitioner, Andy Bryce, in conjunction with Dr. Dennis Bressack, DDS, present a compelling look at how EFT (Emotional Freedom Techniques) can be used to help patients reduce their dental fears and phobias.

In 1-hour sessions with 4 patients who presented with moderate to severe dental fears, Andy. well known for his heart, compassion, insight and humor, gently guides them to reduce their emotions around their dental issues. Freedom From Dental Fears is for use by phobic patients, dentists and staff who want to reduce stress in the office, and for EFT Practitioners who want to see and learn from a true master at work.

We are now offering this amazing DVD set for $24.97

To order click on Buy Now:

On Saturday May 15th and Sunday 16th, 2010, Dr. Bressack and EFT Master Andy Bryce were interviewed by Gary Williams of EFT Blog Talk Radio as part of the free  7 day EFT Global Event. The interview centered around the use of  EFT to reduce dental fears and phobias. Some of the topics covered by Andy were:

1. How best to use EFT in the dental environment.

2. How tapping can be used before dental treatment.

3. The best way to use tapping and the best areas to tap on during treatment.

4. Andy shares a story about 10-year olds using EFT when having dental treatment.

5. How best to market Your EFT practice if you are going to work in this area.

6. Andy shares some personal stories around pain and his experiences.

Dr. Bressack shares his holistic knowledge of dentistry and the following topics:

1. How to combine EFT and dental treatment

2. How the dental envirnment has changed, making it more comfortable for the patient.

3. How interviewing the dentist before treatment can make the patient comfortable with his/her ability and experience.

4. How important it is to seek dental treatment before the situation becomes chronic.

The interview titled, EFT and DENTAL PHOBIA, with an original air date of May 16, 2010, can be found through the following link:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/eft_world_magazine

I am excited to report that on Thursday April 1, 2010, EFT master Andy Bryce and I were interviewed by Till Schilling from Tappy Bear and Life Made Much Easier. We discussed and were asked questions about the 3-DVD set, “Freedom From Dental Fears.” It was fantastic. Check it out at the following link below:

http://AttendThisEvent.com/?eventid=11942940

More exciting news from EFT Master, Andy Bryce and Dr. Dennis W. Bressack. In November 2008, Andy led a workshop called The Art of Receiving. The ad stated that the workshop ” is designed  to release the negative baggage of the past so that we may achieve immediate results from the Law of Attraction. EFT is a form of Energy Psychology that involves tapping on meridian points to release negative emotions. It provides the tools for you to RELEASE your old baggage. Then, anything is possible once the unconscious and the conscious minds are aligned.”

The entire workshop was videotaped by 2 cameras. Although we have not yet had the opportunity to finish the editing, we feel that the information needs to see the light of day, and so we have added some sample videos of the workshop to this website. We hope that you enjoy receiving the benefits of Andy’s unique presentation.

“How many times can a man turn his head and pretend that he just doesn’t see…How many deaths will it take til he knows that too many people have died? The answer, my friend is blowin’ in the wind, the answer is blowin’ in the wind.

Bob Dylan, “Blowin’ in the Wind”

Once again the American Dental Association (ADA) has showed its narrow-minded and antiquated view of the mercury issue. In February of 2009, in its wisdom as a protector of the environment, the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Program agreed on the need to develop a global legally binding instrument on mercury. A letter requesting information was sent to many countries, including the USA. In the September 6, 2010 issue of the ADA News, reported their the ADA’s answer. Ignoring the overwhelming and mounting evidence of the toxicity of mercury silver fillings (amalgam) and swimming against tide of the the obvious national and world trend toward the elimination of it as a restorative material in dental treatment,, the ADA sent a letter in August 2010 that ” urged US negotiators on a global mercury treaty to consider the health benefits of amalgam. The ADA has been in regular contact with the State Department as international negotiations over a potential mercury control treaty intensify.” They have made several recommendations, one of which is that the choice of restorative materials must rest with the patient and dentist. It is particularly irritating and ironic to note that the ADA has done everything possible to eliminate that choice, including, but not limited to, harassing anti-mercury dentists.

Since that time, In February of 2011, I received the following information from Charlie Brown Of Consumers For Dental Choice about the Mercury Treaty Negotiations held in Chiba, Japan

“Our meeting kicked off with the announcement that the World Health Organization has withdrawn the biased paper that the American Dental Association so heavily cited as “reinforcing dental amalgam as a safe and effective restorative material.”**  The alleged WHO report had been passed off as the conclusions of the team of scientists, environmentalists, and dentists who met in November 2009 to discuss the future of amalgam.  We exposed the paper as nothing more than a propaganda piece slapped together by a rogue dentist inside WHO who failed even to consult the other meeting participants before signing their names to his paper (needless to say they were furious; they did not remember ever declaring amalgam safe).  Then, we organized the worldwide condemnation of this paper that led to its hurried retraction.  You can learn how we accomplished this feat step-by-step by watching this video interview, courtesy of filmmaker Kelly Gallagher.***

Because of our work, the first draft of the treaty lists amalgam as one of only five mercury products to be phased out.  While the war is not won, we did succeed in keeping it on the list for now.

Thanks to the efforts of our regional vice presidents Dr. Naji Kodeih and Dominique Bally, both the Arab League and the African region announced that they support the phase-out of amalgam and the promotion of alternatives.

We gained a valuable new ally dedicated to ending dental mercury: Health Care Without Harm.  We congratulate Health Care Without Harm for convincing the Mexico City Health Secretariat to deauthorize the purchase of amalgam in the city’s hospitals and obtaining a discussion paper from Argentina calling for a phase down of amalgam and use of alternatives.

But the bottom line:  The delegates made no major decisions in this early round, not on amalgam, not on anything.  Thus how amalgam will ultimately be addressed in this treaty will not be determined until the third negotiating session, to be held in an African city in October.  Until all the nations re-convene for negotiations, our World Alliance for Mercury-Free Dentistry will be active in each region of the world.

On March 5, 2011, a “town meeting” conducted by FDA’s Center for Devices turned into a major media event highlighting the agency’s failed amalgam policy. Floridians turned out en masse in Orlando on March 5, outraged over FDA’s failure to protect even children from dental mercury.  The event was not only front-page news in Florida – it reached press outlets clear across the country: the Los Angeles Times proclaimed that “Mercury in dental fillings comes under fire at FDA meeting in Orlando.”

And Dr. Shuren told the Orlando Sentinel that “If I had my druthers, I would like to say something this year,” noting that the agency would have to reconsider the scientific and legal issues surrounding the amalgam issue.  It is hardly a timetable, but it’s more than FDA has been willing to say in Washington.

Then on March 10, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration convened a Town Meeting in a Dallas suburb. Several dentists, a dental hygienist, and a number of victims of mercury toxicity turned out.  Although the Town Meeting was open to any subject, amalgam dominated.  The huge press coverage – the major Dallas TV stations and the Fort Worth Star-Telegram – was exclusively about mercury fillings!*

Presiding was the very man in charge of reconsidering FDA’s abysmal amalgam rule:  Center for Devices Director Jeff Shuren.  Dr. Shuren told the Texas press:

“Now, the [FDA scientific] panel did …point out that there may be certain populations who are more sensitive to dental amalgam, like young children and pregnant women.”

“We may decide to change our current regulation and that could include changing the status of dental amalgam, which means it comes off the market or has other controls on it or we may decide to leave things as they are.”

So FDA’s point man on amalgam has announced that FDA is seriously considering protecting children and unborn babies from amalgam.

Then on May 5, I received the following news.

In an extraordinary development that will change the global debate about amalgam, the United States government has announced that it supports a “phase down, with the goal of eventual phase out by all Parties, of mercury amalgam.”  This statement – a radical reversal of its former position that “any change toward the use of dental amalgam is likely to result in positive public health outcomes” –  is part of the U.S. government’s submission for the upcoming third round of negotiations for the world mercury treaty.*

While couched in diplomatic hedging – remember it is still early in the negotiations – this new U.S. position makes three significant breakthroughs for the mercury-free dentistry movement:

1. The U.S. calls for the phase-out of amalgam ultimately and recommends actions to “phase down” its use immediately.  Incredibly, the government adopted three actions that the World Alliance for Mercury-Free Dentistry and Consumers for Dental Choice proposed at the negotiating session in Chiba, Japan.  Our key ally, The Mercury Policy Project, laid the groundwork for this success at a World Health Organization meeting in 2009!
2. The U.S. speaks up for protecting children and the unborn from amalgam, recommending that the nations “educat[e] patients and parents in order to protect children and fetuses.”
3. The U.S. stands up for the human right of every patient and parent to make educated decisions about amalgam.

What does this mean?  Our position – advocating the phase-out of amalgam – is now the mainstream because the U.S. government supports it.  Who is the outlier now?  It’s the pro-mercury faction, represented by the World Dental Federation and the American Dental Association.  With the U.S. continuing its leadership role in this treaty, we will broadcast the U.S. position to other governments around the world, encouraging them to support amalgam “phase downs” leading to phase-outs not only globally, but within each of their countries.

We applaud the U.S. government.  But tough work lies ahead.  For example, we must demonstrate to the world that the available alternatives – such as composites and the adhesive materials used in atraumatic restorative treatment (“ART”) – can cost less than amalgam and will increase access to dental care particularly in developing countries.

For now though, let’s mark this watershed in the mercury-free dentistry movement: the debate has shifted from “whether to end amalgam” to “how to end amalgam.”

Even now, after all this, in the May 16 issue of the ADA News, an editor’s note quoted the ADA Council on Scientific Affairs and Council on Government Affairs in answer to a dentist who questioned the new stand of the FDA and other organizations. “The “important health issue” relate to the value of amalgam as a public health tool along with the importance of prevention-based reducing the demand for amalgam… not to any concern over amalgam safety. … the term “phase down” refers to phase down in demand for amalgam (and all restorative materials), as a result of increased focus on oral disease prevention.”

Yes, it is true that increased attention on oral disease prevention is the goal. However, my take on the rulings is that if tooth restoration is necessary, don’t use amalgam. I guess that one can twist any statements to serve their own agenda. It would be funny if it were not dealing with the health of human beings and the poisoning of our environment.

“When will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?” Pete Seeger “Where Have All the Flowers Gone?”

As a life-long progressive democrat, I am appalled and rather embarrassed over recent statements made by some democrats who characterized Harry Reid’s Senatorial opponent’s opposition to Fluoridation in such a negative light, alluding to the tired and old pro-Fluoride characterization of Flouride opponents as right wing communist plot conspiracy believers. It seems that even our brilliant progressive pundits, Rachel Maddow and Keith Olberman, well respected, astute students of our political world, didn’t do the research necessary to report on this issue, and have been sucked into the fray and suckered by the pro-fluoridation propaganda.

It’s not about whether or not I personally believe that fluoridation as a medical practice is good or bad. I think it’s bad medicine to use a toxic waste product in rinses, toothpastes, sealants and fillings. That usage is what might be considered of topical nature and one generally has a choice in whether or not to use it. But, subjugating an entire population to fluoridated drinking water is at the very least a sad commentary on how science and big business collide at the expense of the health of the people.

And most certainly it’s not at all about believing that Harry Reid’s Republican tea party opponent, Sharron Angle, should even be on the same stage with such a great Senator. I believe that many of her political views are offensive and contrary to what is good about America. It’s just that there are so many of her other philosophical and political views that can be used against her, why use the tired and old fear of a communist plot as a weapon. This is a negative strategy that we often rightly accuse our Republican friends of employing.

At the very least, I would ask that the progressive wing of the democratic party and our beloved political pundits regard fluoridation in the same manner in which they hold dear the mainstay of our belief around the abortion issue. PRO CHOICE.

The following is from an email that I recently received form Paul Connett of Fluoridation Action Network (FAN). Please take the time to read it.

“Being such an extremely bad medical practice, it is not surprising that opposition to fluoridation comes from people all across the political spectrum.  However, for over 60 years it has suited fluoridation proponents to characterize opposition as coming only from right wing extremists who thought that fluoridation was some communist conspiracy. This opposition was brilliantly satirized in Stanley Kubrick’s movie “Dr. Strangelove.” Portraying opponents as crackpots and conspiracy theorists has served the pro-fluoridation cause well because it distracts attention from the very weak science that they claim supports the safety and effectiveness of fluoridation.

As a result of a candidate winning the Republican primary in Nevada, some Democratic supporters have seen it advantageous to use this candidate’s opposition to fluoridation as a way of ridiculing her. Whatever else this person believes, her opposition to fluoridation is not grounds for this kind of treatment. Instead, it reflects badly on those who are using it this way. It indicates that they have done little, if any, research on the matter and have simply taken the simplistic propaganda of fluoridation proponents at face value. In short, they have been duped. It is particularly sad from my own personal perspective that one of the commentators who has joined in this ill-founded abuse has been Rachel Maddow. Hitherto, I have respected this hard hitting and outspoken commentator from the left. But her comments on this matter do not do her credit and makes it doubly difficult to watch the commercials for her program in which she proclaims her fairness. What she is doing here is not fair to the candidate in question, and is not fair to opponents of fluoridation in general and the sooner that she makes a public apology on this matter the better. Moreover, because it betrays a serious lack of research into this issue it undermines the confidence one has in the professionalism of her research staff.

I have written to Rachel Maddow twice on this matter and have received no reply. Others have as well. This week FAN put out a media release on this matter.

Paul Connett

FAN PRESS RELEASE:
Political Mischaracterization of Fluoridation Opposition Dismays Scientists

CANTON, N.Y., June 22 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Scientists representing the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) strongly object to recent mischaracterizations of fluoridation opponents by political pundits Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann and others in conjunction with Senator Harry Reid’s Nevada re-election campaign.

“Fluoridation opposition is science-based and growing,” says Paul Connett, PhD, FAN Executive Director, who has co-authored the upcoming book, “The Case Against Fluoride: How Hazardous Waste Ended Up in Our Drinking Water and the Bad Science and Powerful Politics that Keep it There.” Co-authors are James Beck, MD, PhD, professor emeritus of medical physics at the University of Alberta in Calgary; and Spedding Micklem, DPhil, professor emeritus at Edinburgh University.

“We have spent many years investigating water fluoridation and the toxicity of fluoride and we are dismayed that commentators are willing to repeat, without verification, pro-fluoridation statements that disparage scientists and citizens who oppose the practice,” says Connett.

“FAN’s website http://www.FluorideAlert.org has a wealth of scientific information indicating that water fluoridation is neither safe nor effective,” says Connett.  ”In fact, mounting evidence shows that it is harmful to large segments of the population and has helped to create an epidemic of dental fluorosis in children.”  On April 12, 2010, Time magazine listed fluoride as one of the “Top Ten Common Household Toxins” and described fluoride as both “neurotoxic and potentially tumorigenic if swallowed.”

“The majority of countries do not fluoridate or have ended the practice, including 98% of Western Europe, and yet, according to WHO statistics, their tooth decay rates are no different than those in fluoridated countries,” Connett states.

The FAN website has an online DVD of 15 scientists explaining why fluoridation is a risky and inappropriate medical practice.  These scientists include one Nobel Prize winner, three members of a National Research Council committee that published a groundbreaking report on fluoride’s toxicity in 2006, and two former EPA scientists.

According to Nobel laureate Arvid Carlsson, fluoridation is an “obsolete” practice that “is against all principles of modern pharmacology.”  FAN’s site also has a listing of over 2800 scientists and professionals who are calling for an end to fluoridation worldwide.

The Centers for Disease Control and the American Dental Association now concede that fluoride’s predominant action on the tooth is topical, not systemic, as it works on the outside of the tooth, not from inside the body. Both groups admit that using fluoridated water to prepare infant formula elevates the risk of dental fluorosis and they advise using very low or non-fluoridated water to lessen the risk.  Pediatricians rarely inform parents of this advice.

“Topical treatments like fluoridated toothpaste are readily available. It makes no sense to expose the whole body to this toxic substance or force it on people who do not want it,” says Connett.

According to Connett and other scientists, “Fluoridation is reckless as there is clear science indicating that fluoride has the potential to damage human bones, kidneys, thyroid and to lower children’s IQs.”

Unfortunately, it seems as though the hard-nosed position that organized dentistry in the USA, led by the American Dental Association (ADA), has taken on the safety of mercury dental fillings, has placed itself  into an unenviable position of being the lone voice, surrounded by a world that has greatly curtailed the usage of this known human and environmental poison. It has painted into a corner out of which it gets more and more difficult to leave with its’ dignity in tact.

An alarming AP report on June 25, 2010, stated that “ Sperm Whales feeding in even the most remote reaches of Earth’s oceans have built up shockingly high levels of toxic and heavy metals, according to American scientists who say the findings spell danger not only for marine life but for the millions of humans who depend on seafood.

High levels of cadmium, aluminum, chromium, lead, titanium and the two major ingredients of Dental Amalgam fillings silver and mercury were found in tissue samples taken by dart gun from nearly 1,000 whales over five years. From polar areas to equatorial waters, the whales ingested pollutants that may have been produced by humans thousands of miles away, the researchers said.

“These contaminants, I think, are threatening the human food supply. They certainly are threatening the whales and the other animals that live in the ocean,” said biologist Roger Payne, founder and president of Ocean Alliance, the research and conservation group that produced the report.

The researchers found mercury levels as high as 16 parts per million in the whales. Fish high in mercury such as shark and swordfish — the types health experts warn children and pregnant women to avoid — typically have levels of about 1 part per million.

The whales studied averaged 2.4 parts of mercury per million, but the report’s authors said their internal organs probably had much higher levels than the skin samples.

“The entire ocean life is just loaded with a series of contaminants, most of which have been released by human beings,” Payne said in an interview at the International Whaling Commission’s annual meeting.

Payne said sperm whales, which occupy the top of the food chain, absorb the contaminants and pass them on to the next generation when a female nurses her calf. “What she’s actually doing is dumping her lifetime accumulation of that fat-soluble stuff into her baby,” he said, and each generation passes on more to the next.

Ultimately, he said, the contaminants could jeopardize seafood, a primary source of animal protein for 1 billion people.

“You could make a fairly tight argument to say that it is the single greatest health threat that has ever faced the human species. I suspect this will shorten lives, if it turns out that this is what’s going on,” he said.

The ongoing struggle to remove the mercury amalgam fillings from dental materials and from our  environment rages on. Despite a plethora of research pointing to the toxicity of  mercury amalgam fillings and a worldwide interest in boycotting top dental amalgam seller Henry Schein Inc. (Consumers from every state in the USA and twenty-four countries so far have voiced their support for the boycott, endorsing a letter to Schein’s CEO), in 2009 the FDA issued a ruling in support of the safety of mercury amalgam fillings. As a result, the Consumers for Dental Choice led by  Charlie Brown, took the issue to the international level.  They joined with consumer organizations from around the world, founded the World Alliance for Mercury-Free Dentistry and took their message to the United Nations mercury treaty negotiations held in early June, 2010 in Stockholm, Sweden.

The following is a letter to Charlie Brown from The World Alliance of Mercury-Free Dentistry.

“We had our first opportunity to address a hundred nations at once about our cause during our opening speech to the governmental delegates.  Our highly talented and energetic international team of advocates and mercury-free dentists from seven nations ran an information booth, distributed literature, gave presentations, networked with like-minded organizations, educated delegates, and convinced the world that it must find a solution to the dental mercury problem:

— The United Nations Environmental Programme officials observed that dental amalgam drew more interest than any other single issue during the session.  As a result, substantial attention will be devoted to dental mercury between now and the next session in January.

— The Scandinavian nations pointedly asked the world’s nations to join them in phasing out amalgam.

— Leaders from four developing nations asked us to assist them in organizing pilot programs for phasing out amalgam, a critical step according to the UN.

— Diplomats from the U.S. State Department and top officials from the U.S. EPA were engaged in our message and requesting more information.

— The leaders of the World Health Organization shifted from defending amalgam use to outlining the steps it endorses to reduce its use.

I can’t say enough about the team we assembled in Stockholm.  We were tutored by Elisabet Carlsson, the advocate whose work led to the Swedish ban on amalgam.  Dentist Graeme Munro-Hall of Great Britain, co-author with his wife Lilian of ToxicDentistry Exposed, eloquently explained the science supporting mercury-free dentistry.  We joined forces with the dedicated leaders of our movement in other major countries, such as Servando Pérez-Dominguez of Spain, Marie Grosman of France, and Angela Kilmartin of Great Britain.  The multi-lingual talents of Anita Vazquez Tibau ofCalifornia and Kathy Huddlestone of France allowed us to reach out to even more delegates.  And so many other outstanding folks stepped in to help out.

When the U.S. Food and Drug Administration showed up at the Stockholm session to protect mercury fillings, our international team was right there to expose the flaws in the agency’s amalgam defense.  Back in the United States, FDA was already facing a grassroots outcry from the American people and three separate petitions filed by Jim Turner, by Bob Reeves and Jim Love, and by emeritus University of Virginia professor Dr. Richard Edlich.  With the Scandinavians announcing that “dental treatment without mercury is becoming the norm” and other health departments at least putting limits on amalgam use, FDA realized that it is the pariah on the dental mercury issue (countries such as Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands have phased out amalgam; Germany and Canada direct dentists not to use it in vulnerable populations; Japan uses it in less than 4% of fillings; etc.).  In an attempt to save face the day before the negotiating session ended, FDA announced that it will hold hearings in December before the next UN session to consider whether American children, pregnant women, and other vulnerable populations should be protected from dental mercury exposure.

We could not have come this far without all our grassroots activists and supporters, both national and now international.  In the words of FDA Webview, your efforts have been “unprecedented”:  “No final rule in FDA’s modern history, or perhaps ever, has attracted this kind of organized opposition.”  Thanks to all of you, our movement has made FDA realize that the mercury fillings issue is not going away.”

The ADA’s first response to the impending FDA dental advisory board meeting can be found in the lead article of the June 21, 2010  issue (Volume 41 No.12) of the ADA News titled FDA plans New Review of Dental Amalgam. In the article, it states that  ”although the FDA had concluded that dental amalgam was a safe and effective restorative treatment and issued a final rule in 2009 that the ADA (American Dental Association) supported, then reclassified dental mercury and amalgam components for regulatory purposes, it will convene a dental advisory panel Dec. 14-15 to review “scientific issues that may affect the regulation of dental amalgam.”

The following is from the FDA’s website.

“The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today announced plans to hold an advisory panel on Dec. 14-15, 2010, to discuss several scientific issues that may affect the regulation of dental amalgam, used for direct filling of carious lesions or structural defects in teeth. The panel meeting will focus particularly on the potential risk to vulnerable populations, such as pregnant women, fetuses, and young children.

Used to treat tooth decay, dental amalgam is a mixture of metals, composed of liquid mercury and a powdered amalgam alloy, composed primarily of silver, tin, and copper.

On July 28, 2009, the FDA issued a final rule that reclassified dental mercury from a class I device to class II, classified dental amalgam as a class II device, and designated special controls for dental amalgam, mercury and amalgam alloy. The special control for the devices is a guidance titled, “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Dental Amalgam, Mercury and Amalgam Alloy.”

Since that time, the agency has received several petitions raising various issues relating to the final rule and special controls.

The concerns raised include the adequacy of the risk assessment method used by the FDA in classifying dental amalgam, the bioaccumulative effect of mercury, the exposure of pediatric populations to mercury vapor, and the adequacy of the clinical studies on dental amalgam. In addition, a recent report on risk assessments issued by the National Academy of Sciences, titled “Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment, NAP 2009,” proposes new approaches to conducting risk assessments. These may be some of the issues the agency asks the advisory committee to review.”

It is important to note that the dental products panel of FDA’s medical devices advisory panel can only advise the FDA and can not overrule the FDA’s 2009 decision. It is however the first step to the possible overruling of the FDA’s decision and a re-classification to reflect the true nature of dental mercury amalgams toxicity and risk. As it has done time and time again, on many health issues related to dentistry, including the drive to recommend amalgam separators in every dental office, my hope is that the ADA would finally have the guts to reverse its position and regain its’ place as the leader of my esteemed profession.