A nonprofit consumer group sued the California Dental Board on Monday, seeking to force distribution of a new fact sheet outlining the dangers of mercury used in amalgam fillings.
Although the dental board approved the new fact sheet in July, the suit says it is still distributing an older version that is long and confusing and that minimizes the health risks of fillings containing mercury.
"The citizenry should be alarmed that a profession has decided that disclosure is against their interests," said Charles Brown, national counsel for Consumers for Dental Choice [See below], which filed the suit.
The dental board is to present a revised version of the fact sheet at a meeting this month, but the meeting has not been scheduled. Fearing a delaying tactic on the part of the board, consumer advocates sued.
Dental board members are not stalling, said the board's executive director, Cynthia Gatlin, on Monday, but are busy working on the new fact sheet.
"Frankly, I'm quite surprised that we're being sued for a fact sheet that we're busy working on right now," Gatlin said.
When the new fact sheet is ready, Gatlin said, the board will have 10 days to give notice of a meeting — something she said still could happen by the end of the year.
"I don't see that being an impossibility," Gatlin said.
Monday's suit is another twist in an 11-year debate over the health risks posed by amalgam — half mercury and half other metals — and how best to inform consumers about them.
In 1992, then state Sen. Diane Watson wrote a statute requiring the dental board to adopt a fact sheet disclosing the risks of dental restorative materials, including amalgam. Two have been issued; but the state consumer protection agency rejected one as inadequate, and a newer version has been challenged by consumer advocates.
Organizations representing dentists have maintained that amalgam is safe.
"Our goal, being a good public resource, is to base everything on scientific evidence, and currently there is no scientific evidence to prove amalgam is deleterious to someone's health," said Lori Reed, a spokeswoman for the California Dental Assn.
Under Proposition 65, passed in 1986, mercury is listed as a potential cause of birth defects or other reproductive health problems. The measure required consumers to be notified of such risks.
Watson, now a U.S. representative from Los Angeles, said Monday that she hoped the lawsuit would encourage the dental board to act.
source: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-dental9dec09,1,5663685.story 9dec03
Consumers for Dental Choice
1400 16th Street, NW, Suite 330
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 462-8800
Fax: (202) 265-6564
E-mail: consumers@swankin-turner.com
Consumers for Dental Choice is a consumer policy research institution managed by The National Institute for Science, Law, and Public Policy, affiliated with the law firm of Swankin & Turner.
Consumers for Dental Choice seeks a level playing field for mercury-free dentistry – the opportunity for consumers to make informed choices about their dental care, and for mercury-free dentists to practice ethically in competition with traditional dentistry.
Consumers for Dental Choice is managed by the National Institute for Science, Law, and Public Policy, a non-profit consumer advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C. that has championed consumer rights to information, safety and choice for 20 years. The project is organized by two national consumer organizations:
Consumers for Dental Choice is supported by the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, the Holistic Dental Association, and by academicians, dentists, and physicians who are not necessarily members of those particular dental groups.
Mercury-free dentistry has increasing academic, scientific and political support. Consumers for Dental Choice recognizes that there are different viewpoints on this issue, and notes that the American Dental Association has traditionally opposed mercury-free dentistry. However, the ADA itself acknowledges that some consumers have an allergic hypersensitivity to mercury – a known heavy-metal toxin – and even the staunchest amalgam advocates recognize that at least some consumers should not have these fillings. Additionally, in 1996, Health Canada (Canada’s health department) recommended that dentists discontinue the use of amalgams in the mouths of pregnant women, people with kidney disorders, and others with high health risks.
It is the aim of Consumers for Dental Choice and its supporting public, including members of the dental profession, the medical profession and academia, to protect both informed consumer choice and freedom of speech without sacrificing safety. Consumers for Dental Choice supports education of dentists on the removal of amalgams to ensure safe dental procedures nationwide and the consumer’s right to know the potential health consequences of getting amalgams, removing them, or leaving them intact.
source: http://www.swankin-turner.com/projects.html 9dec03
|
To
send us your comments, questions, and suggestions click
here |