Below is Congresswoman Diane Watson's statement concerning the
introduction of her Bill to prohibit the use of mercury in dental
fillings.

Because of the anthrax situation, the congresswoman's office prefers
you e-mail your support for this enormously important Bill. (Snail
mail is now too cumbersome as every letter must now be sanitized to
every Member of Congress.)

Your e-mail should be addressed to Congresswoman Watson:
diane.watson@.... Be sure and include your full mailing
address.

Statement by Congresswoman Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles)
Mercury in Dental Filling Disclosure and Prohibition Act
Los Angeles, California
November 5, 2001

In times like these, there are toxins that we don't know about – how
to control them, their source and their impact. But there are toxins
that we DO know about – toxins that we know do not belon in our
bodies, toxins that we can do something about. My bill addresses that
very problem.

Mercury is an acute neuro-toxin. It is the most toxic non-radioactive
element and the most volatile heavy metal. In recent years, it has
been, or is being removed from all health care uses, save one.
Antibiotics have replaced oral doses of Mercury. The disinfectant
Mercurochrome is banned. Recently, the Centers for Disease Control
ordered Mercury preservatives removed from childhood vaccines.
Mercury preservatives are no long used in contact lens solutions.
This year, legislatures in California and several other states banned
Mercury thermometers. When Governor Gray Davis signed bills
addressing Mercury in thermometers and in dental fillings, he
said, "Mercury is a persistent and toxic pollutant that
bioaccumulates in the environment." In recent years, the American
Public Health Association, the California Medical Association and
Health Care Without Harm have all called for the elimination of
putting any Mercury in the human body.

Today, I am announcing legislation to disclose and phase-out the last
major use of Mercury in the human body. The fillings that organized
dentistry wrongly calls "silver" are mainly Mercury, not "silver."

Mercury is the major ingredient in each filling, about one-half gram
per. In the words of Professor Boyd Haley of the University of
Kentucky, that is a "colossal" amount of Mercury in scientific terms –
as much, in fact, as is in a thermometer. A teenager with six
fillings has six Mercury thermometers worth of Mercury in his or her
mouth.

The Mercury in the fillings is volatile, such that – as all
authorities concede – poisonous vapors are constantly being emitted
from the fillings, more so when one chews or passes hot liquid over
the teethe. The Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry of the
United States Public Health Service reports that those poisonous
vapors go first to the brain and kidneys. For the developing brain –
and by that I mean a child's brain – a major health risk exists.

It is in fact children who are at greatest risk from these fillings.
The government of Canada recommended back in 1996 that dentists not
place fillings in the mouths of children or pregnant women. (The 1999
report on Mercury by the Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease
Registry says Mercury passes through the placenta into the developing
child's brain.) In 1997, a major manufacturer of dental amalgam,
Dentsply, said that amalgam is CONTRAINDICATED (translation DO NOT
USE) for children and pregnant women, as well as for those with
braces, Mercury hypersensitivities, or kidney problems. Another
manufacturer, Vivadent, added a contraindication for nursing mothers.
(The 1999 government report says the Mercury goes through the
mother's breast milk into the baby.)

Why don't consumers already know this? The answer is a disappointing
one. Organized dentistry is extremely divided on this issue. My bill,
in fact is supported by the American Academy of Biological Dentistry.
But the American Dental Association tells the public that the
fillings are safe. The ADA does not tell the public that it accepts
payments from the amalgam manufacturers while it pronounces their
product safe. I wish to note that the American Medical Association
has a policy prohibiting the organization from taking money for
product endorsements. The ADA, by contrast, accepts money from the
manufacturers of the products it endorses which certainly hurts its
credibility in my mind.

The public does not know about the presence of Mercury and its risks
for two reasons. First, the fillings are falsely called "silver."
This term is deceptive, because there is much more Mercury than
silver in the product. It's time to call it what it is and quit
hiding the large presence of Mercury.

Second, the ADA has a rule that gags dentists from talking about the
risks of Mercury amalgam, a rule that some dental boards enforce
against dentists who call for the elimination of Mercury in dental
fillings. I understand that rule is being challenged by dentists in
federal court in Maryland based on the First Amendment.

Developments in this area have been quite encouraging this year in my
state. In 1992, as a state Senator, I wrote a law that required the
Dental Board of California to write a "Fact Sheet" about the risks
and efficacies of dental fillings. My goal was to ensure the public
could make informed choices about Mercury dental amalgam. But the
Dental Board continued to ignore the law and, in recent years, defy
the Davis Administration's insistence that it comply with this law.
After an impasse, including the Board refusing to show up for a
hearing in Los Angeles on this issue, the Legislature stepped in and
shut down the Board. I am told that never before has the California
Legislature shut down a board before its Sunset date expired. In
January, a new Dental Board will come into existence.

A major environmental issue exists here. When removed from a
patient's mouth, Mercury amalgam is a hazardous waste, and it is
often improperly disposed of. The more Mercury that goes into
people's teeth, the more of it that will end up in our water supply.
I am delighted, therefore, that San Francisco-based Clean Water
Action is supporting my bill, and I look forward to other
environmental groups joining us in this effort.

The occupational risk is significant. Dental employees are constantly
exposed to the vapors. Women in dental offices have lower fecundity
(pregnancy) rates, more miscarriages, and more problem births.
Mercury exposure is the likely reason. Dentists have the highest
suicide rate of any profession; depression leading to suicide is
consistent with a diagnosis of Mercury toxicity.

Mercury amalgam is dangerous before it is put in the mouth – any
dental journal will tell you that – and it is considered hazardous
waste after it has been removed. Who can conclusively say it's safe
in between when it is in our bodies?

A major social justice, or environment justice, issue exists here.
While the public lacks informed choice, low- and moderate-income
people have it worse: they have no choice at all. For families on
Medi-Cal, the children get Mercury – or nothing. It is outrageous
that low-income Americans are forced to have such a toxic material
put in their mouths. I understand that the Rhode Island legislature
adopted a law this year to provide choice in insurance plans, and
that the state of Maine permits Medicaid children to get alternatives
to amalgam – so, yes, we can do it differently.

Mercury, and all other poisons in the body, hurt the body's immune
system – its ability to withstand diseases and biologically harmful
agents. If at any time in our nations history we need strong immune
systems, it is now. The stronger our bodies, the more able we are to
fend off biological agents that have so tragically been placed in our
midst.

My bill will protect children, pregnant women, and nursing mothers
immediately – regardless of their income. Henceforth, amalgam will
bear warnings that they not be placed in these most vulnerable
people. And there will be health warnings for all consumers of
amalgam, also immediately. Then, there is a five-year phase out of
Mercury amalgam. That will give dentistry plenty of time to shift to
alternatives that exist in today's market – resin, porcelain, and
gold – or to develop new materials.

Dentistry says amalgam is fine because it has been in ;use for 150
years. This statement, makes no scientific sense. We have abandoned
other remnants of pre-Civil War medicine, and we have abandoned all
other uses of Mercury. It is no longer a question of if, but when.
Mercury dental fillings will be history. I say five more years is
time enough.


http://www.bioprobe.com/ReadNews.asp?article=42


http://www.bioprobe.com/index2.asp