7/31/2019 Amalgam Ltr Congress 090915

1/2

September 15, 2009

U.S. House of RepresentativesWashington, DC 20515

Dear Representative:

The American Dental Association (ADA) urges you not to cosponsor H. Res. 648.This resolution advances the misconception that because dental amalgam containsmercury, it is toxic. This view is not supported in a recent ruling by the U.S. Food and DrugAdministration, which calls in to question many of the resolutions findings.

H. Res. 648 is premised on the notion that the mercury in dental amalgam makes it toxic.

This view is simply not supported by the vast body of credible, peer-reviewed science. Infact, many claims of amalgam being a toxic substance have been based on non-peerreviewed junk science and an abundance of misinformation that has flourished on theInternet. The mercury in dental amalgam, for example, is not the same form of mercurythat triggers the fish warnings with which we are all familiar (i.e., methylmercury). Rather,dental amalgam contains elementalmercury, which is used to bind silver, copper and tininto a hard, stable substancea durable metal alloy that has been used to safely restorethe teeth of more than 100 million Americans.

The FDA acted properly in its recent decision to categorize encapsulated dental amalgamas a Class II medical device, placing it in the same class as gold and tooth-coloredcomposite fillings. The agencys decision was based on the review of some 200 scientific

studies. It factored in countless written and oral testimonies from outside groups, which itsolicited on more than one occasion, and even endured a court action brought forward by asmall but vocal faction of amalgam opponents. In the end, the agency concluded that:

The long-term clinical studies in adults and children aged six and older with dentalamalgam fillings have not established a causal link between dental amalgam andadverse health effects.

The research on the potential health effects of dental amalgam in developingfetuses, breast-fed infants and children under age six is limited, but the availablescientific evidence suggests that these populations are not at risk.

Some patients may develop contact reactions within the oral cavity due to anallergy or sensitivity to the mercury or other metals in dental amalgam.

The FDA should be commended for basing its ruling on the best available science andpresenting its findings in a clear and comprehensible way. The agencys decision affirmsthe widely supported view that dental amalgam is safe and has not been shown to causeharm to patients, except in rare cases of localized allergic reaction.

7/31/2019 Amalgam Ltr Congress 090915

2/2

Members of the U.S. House of RepresentativesSeptember 15, 2009Page 2

The ADA is Americas leading advocate for oral health. We believe public policy should be

guided by sound science, carefully analyzed and applied to the facts. In the interest ofensuring that public policy is guided by credible, peer-reviewed science, we urge you notto cosponsor H. Res. 648. If you have any questions, please contact Michael Graham at202-789-5167 or grahamm@ada.org.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Findley, D.D.S.President

/s/

Kathleen T. OLoughlin, D.D.S., M.P.H.Executive Director

JSF:KTO:RJB:nh