Mercury, considered to be both the most toxic non-radioactive element and the most volatile heavy metal, is being removed from all health care uses - save one. For example, the disinfectant Mercurochrome is banned; mercury thermometers have been outlawed in over a dozen states (including California); and the Center for Disease Control has ordered manufacturers to cease putting mercury preservatives in vaccines. The exception - mercury in dental amalgam fillings - sadly trumps all other uses both in magnitude of mass product and unrelenting harm to the human body. Each amalgam filling has as much mercury as a thermometer, and its poisonous vapors are constantly emitted from the teeth to the brain, a particular risk, according to the U.S. government, to the developing brain of the child. The fetus is at the greatest risk of all if the pregnant woman has dental fillings drilled out or implanted, because of the proven transport of mercury through the placenta. So too is the nursing infant of a woman with amalgam dental fillings, because of the transport of mercury into the breast milk. (Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry, U.S. Public Health Service: Toxicological Profile on Mercury (Update), 1999); Dentsply material data fact sheet).

The continued use of mercury-laden dental fillings is now a subject of heated debate between the scientific community, who almost universally opposes it (see, e.g., www.testfoundation.org), and the dental community, whose majority still supports its use. A vocal and growing minority of dentists, however, strongly opposes its use. Medical and public health groups also oppose the use of mercury in health care (see, e.g., resolutions by the California Medical Association and the American Public Health Association, and a recent position paper by the American Academy of Pediatrics. (www.testfoundation.org/environmentalhg.htm) Thus, organized dentistry now stands alone as the only health group still supporting the use of mercury in the human body. Why? Some point to the vested economic interest of the American Dental Association (ADA) in the economic success of amalgam. The ADA sells its name for product endorsements, and accepts money from those product manufacturers - a practice condemned as unethical by the American Medical Association. The ADA also licenses products, and even held two patents on amalgams.

That mercury would remain the most common dental filling is based primarily, we believe, on the fact that consumers aren't being told the truth, that amalgam fillings contain 50% mercury, a known neuro toxin. Worse, they are deceived: the ADA still uses the deceptive word "silver" to describe a product that is mainly mercury, thus hiding the product's main ingredient. Furthermore, the ADA has a "gag rule" and enforces it through state dental boards, which prohibits dentists from initiating discussion critical of amalgam's health effects. (Wall Street Journal, May 10, 2001)

The health risks of mercury-based products on vulnerable subpopulations have so alarmed scientists that other countries, such as Canada, and even some product manufacturers, have urged that amalgam not be used in treatment for children, pregnant women, and nursing mothers. (Source: Health Canada warnings; Dentsply data sheet contraindications.) Youth are also at risk; one study found 22,000 times the normal amount of mercury in the hearts of teenagers and young adults stricken by heart attacks, who commonly are minority athletes. (study available)

Substitutes exist for amalgam, including composite (or resin), ceramic, porcelain and gold. Because of the slightly higher cost of placing composites, the most commonly used alternative dental filling, Medicaid and barebones insurance plans force children to use amalgam, even though it is well known that some will have adverse reactions.

Severe environmental issues surround mercury's use in dentistry. In fact, now that other uses are being better regulated and abandoned, refuse from dental offices is now the leading cause of mercury into the wastewaters and food chain. The free ride given dentistry is the subject of a report by several national environmental groups, being released in June 2002, entitled "Dentist, the Menace?"

Partly because of increasing familiarity with the problem, and partly for cosmetic reasons, higher-income families are increasingly opting for substitutes for amalgam. Low-income families lack such an option. This very concern was spotlighted in a 2001 resolution of the National Black Caucus of State Legislators. In 2002 Congresswoman Diane Watson (D-Calif.) and Congressman Dan Burton (R-Ind.) introduced a bill to phase out all amalgam use in five years . Similar mini "Watson-Burton" bills have been introduced in several state legislatures. It will take a team of devoted advocates to have these Bills passed. Meanwhile low-income children continue to be forced to have mercury-based dental fillings, and parents of all income levels are being told the material is "silver."