DentistryFood and Drug Administration

Why is the FDA to Review Science Behind Ruling on Mercury in Dental Fillings?

Existing fillings sometimes need to be replaced due to wear, chipping, or cracking. Many people use this opportunity to replace their silver amalgam fillings with natural, tooth-colored composites. Their reasons may be aesthetic, or concern over the safety of amalgam filings, which contain mercury.

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to review science behind ruling on mercury in dental fillings.

Less than 18 months after concluding that mercury in dental fillings was not harmful to patients, the Food and Drug Administration is reviewing the scientific basis for its decision.

A panel of outside experts will meet next week to consider challenges from four consumer and dental groups to the analysis that FDA used to justify its conclusion that mercury released from dental amalgam fillings is too low to cause harm.

Agency officials said Thursday there’s no new evidence contradicting that assessment, and that “at this time FDA is not modifying its existing guidance.”

The FDA’s position is supported by the American Dental Assn., which says that treatment decisions should be left to patients and their dentists.

Opponents say FDA used flawed science in setting the safe level for mercury exposure too high, especially for pregnant women and children.

They want dental amalgam either banned or subject to extensive testing to prove safety.

The advisory committee will not vote on specific recommendations, but will discuss a series of technical questions about how exposure to mercury is measured, whether safe levels of exposure have been set correctly and the reliability of studies of mercury on humans.

This is political payback by the Obama Administration to the “Holistic Dentistry” quacks who want to outlaw dental amalgam.

Earth to FDA – most dentists are no longer using amalgam in restorations because of patient demand and the availability of better tooth-colored materials.

Should dental amalgam be banned only the poor children who receive these long lasting and LESS EXPENSIVE restorations as a result of Medicaid or other government programs will be harmed.

So, do your study again, waste more public money and come to the same conclusions.