Search results for: amalgam

By Michael D. Fleming, DDS This article was published in the February 2013 edition of "DentalTown" Magazine There is a no greater challenge in dentistry these days than accurately predicting the future of dental amalgam use and FDA regulation. Given the more restrictive trends in federal and international regulatory policy with respect to mercury in general, and dental amalgam mercury in particular, it is very timely to address the current state of amalgam regulation, discuss common misconceptions in the ongoing amalgam safety debate and offer recommendations for future amalgam use. Click here to read this 2012 report    

The following is the Position Statement on Dental Amalgam from the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology submitted in response to the "Call for Information" extended by the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified health Risks (SCENIHR). Read More »

In January 2012, the FDA had actually prepared a "Safety Communication" that recommended reducing the use of mercury amalgam in the general population, and avoiding it in susceptible sub-populations: pregnant and nursing women children under six years of age people with allergy to mercury or other components people with neurological disease people with renal disease recognized the risk of occupational exposure for dental personnel The recommendations were never made public, and in January 2015, the FDA issued another statement saying that amalgam was unequivocally safe for everyone. Somehow, somewhere in the reaches of government and the Health and [...]

This paper, written by engineer Robert Cartland, who testified about his own experiences with mercury toxicity at the December, 2010, FDA hearings, is a very thorough, deeply researched look at the issues under debate concerning dental amalgam. View Article: Cartland -US Dental Amalgam Debate 2010 FDA Meeting 2012-11-18

On December 14 and 15, 2010, the FDA convened a scientific panel to re-examine the issue of mercury exposure from amalgam dental fillings. Two private foundations, assisted by IAOMT, commissioned G. Mark Richardson, PhD, of SNC Lavallin, Ottawa, Canada, formerly of Health Canada, to provide the scientific panel and FDA regulators with a formal risk assessment using the latest information from the scientific literature.  Previously published risk assessments dated from the 1990's.  Meanwhile, newer studies have uncovered more toxicity produced by lower levels of mercury exposure, and various government agencies have been reducing their allowed exposure levels. The final work [...]

The 2009 IAOMT prepared the attached petition for a group of citizens as part of an effort to use all available legal means to overturn the FDA's classification of dental amalgam as a Class II device. The thrust of the petition is found in this quote: "We have no doubt that the FDA has the resources and expertise to properly assess the risks associated with dental amalgam. Sadly, the FDA's clear priority is to defend at all costs the continued use of mercury in dentistry - even at the expense of public health. It is not surprising, therefore, that FDA [...]

Michael D. Fleming, DDS i Janine E. Janosky, PhD ii Synopsis  Objective. This article offers a practical assessment of the cost implications of an outright total ban on amalgam use as well as a partial ban in children, pregnant women and women of childbearing age. In addition, we discuss trends in amalgam use and the impact of a ban in these populations on the future utilization of broad based dental services. Methods. We utilized the American Dental Association 2005-06 Survey of Dental Services Rendered and Dental Economics Fee Surveys for 2006 and 2007 to evaluate the current levels of amalgam [...]

This is the famous "White Paper" presented by the FDA dental division staff to the Scientific Advisory Panel in September, 2006, purporting to represent the available scientific literature on mercury exposure from amalgam dental fillings, and which supported the notion of amalgam safety. The panel ultimately voted 13-7 to reject the idea that the literature was adequately searched and that amalgam safety was proven. View Article: FDA Dental Staff "White Paper" on Amalgam