Mercury Policy Project

Chairman of the Congressional Domestic Policy Subcommittee, Dennis Kucinich, and Congresswoman Diane Watson sent a written request to EPA to reduce mercury pollution by tightening dental mercury regulations with Best Management Practices and amalgam separators.  They point out that dental mercury is a serious source of mercury pollution and comprises over half of all mercury in use today, amounting to over 1000 tons.  They call upon the EPA to reevaluate and update its mercury emission factors based upon more complete data and provide a plan to Congress by February 16th.

Global NGO’s ask the World Health Organization (WHO) to consider the health and environmental impact from continued use of dental mercury fillings.  Because effective global control of mercury releases from dental mercury would be extraordinarily difficult and inordinately expensive, they urge the WHO to recommend the use of viable mercury-free alternatives to all countries.  The letter to the WHO was signed by over 70 non-governmental environmental and health organizations from around the world.

Michael Bender, on behalf of Mercury Policy Project and Zero Mercury Working Group, presented at the World Health Organization’s Dental Restoration Materials Meeting.  He discussed the role of UNEP Mercury Storage-Supply Partnership in reducing dental mercury exposure worldwide.  Bender pointed out that reducing the supply, demand, and trade of mercury is more effective than trying to control releases.

MPP sent the attached letter from numerous national and state environmental, health and consumer groups to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson on the EPA-ADA dental mercury Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).  In the letter, groups urge Jackson to consider terminating the MOU–which was adopted during the waning days of the Bush Administration–in favor of national goal-based mercury reduction standards for the U.S. dental industry.  The letter notes that EPA has had a history under the previous Administration of ignoring the significant discharge of mercury by the dental community and that Congressional hearings have failed to elicit sufficient recognition of the dental mercury problem or steps necessary to remedy them by the Agency (see government reports from 2008 and 2007.)  In fact, information provided by MPP to Congress clearly indicates that dental mercury releases are far greater than previously thought.

While Congress had asked the prior EPA Administrator for a response to the findings of the Congressional hearings, the Agency thus far to our knowledge has not adequately responded or clearly recognized the significance of the Congressional findings.

The Dominican Sisters of Hope, supported by Consumers for Dental Choice and the Mercury Policy Project, presented a resolution calling on the Danaher (DHR: NYSE) corporation to transition out of manufacturing mercury fillings at the company’s annual shareholder meeting at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington D.C. on Tuesday, May 5 (see press release). Danaher owns Kerr, the largest manufacturer of mercury amalgam. “Mercury is highly toxic, can cause permanent harm to a fetus, to a child’s developing brain or an adult’s kidneys,” said Valerie Heinonen, o.s.u., a consultant in corporate responsibility who will be representing the Dominican Sisters of Hope, which owns a block of Danaher shares. “The underserved are at great risk because of the continued use of mercury amalgam. We think it is wrong to put them at such risk when there are suitable alternatives available.”

After two congressional oversight hearings (at which MPP recently testified, see posts below) concerning the environmental release of dental mercury, a US House Government Oversight subcommittee is calling on the Food and Drug Administration to reform its rulemaking on dental mercury, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act. In a July 28, 2008 letter to FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach, Domestic Policy Subcommittee Chairman Dennis Kucinich reminded FDA of its statutory duty under NEPA to prepare an environmental impact statement or conduct an environmental assessment as part of the rulemaking process in reclassifying dental mercury, classifying encapsulated amalgam alloy and dental mercury or issuing special controls for amalgam alloy.

MPP director Michael Bender testifies today before a US Congressional Government Oversight Subcommittee on Domestic Policy hearing, entitled “Assessing State and Local Regulations to Reduce Mercury Emissions.” During his testimony, Bender presents MPP’s new report, “Facing Up to the Hazards of Mercury Tooth Fillings,” which lays out the rationale for placing a user fee on the continued use of dental mercury as a means to cover the costs of preventing dental mercury pollution from environmental release. Specifically, the report recommends that a user fee of $30.00 be assessed on amalgam manufacturers for the production of each mercury tooth filling, payable at time of sale. Funds collected should be placed into a designated account to cover the costs of controlling mercury pollution. The report also shows the cost-effectiveness of amalgam separators at preventing mercury from getting into the environment and clearly demonstrates that voluntary programs are not effective in convincing dentists to install and properly maintain separators.

After 32 years of delay, the Food and Drug Administration has finally agreed to comply with the law and set a date to classify mercury amalgam as a substance that poses a health risk to pregnant women and unborn babies, and children. This about-face resulted from settling, earlier this week, our lawsuit, Moms Against Mercury et al. v. Von Eschenbach, Commissioner, et al. (see Press Release) Stating it was an “unreasonable delay” and “an reasonable case of failure to act.” As reflected in the May 16, 2008 court transcripts, Judge Ellen Huvelle states that the “probability of harm is enormous,” and asked the FDA: “How could you drag your feet for 32 years? Do what you are supposed to do.” (see full transcript) Judge Huvelle also states that she couldn’t “order a ban, but can compel to act,” observing that this was “government at its worst” and that she wanted this “public safety issue to be resolved.” The FDA must now finish classification within one year of the close of the public comment period on its amalgam policy, that is, by July 28, 2009.

As part of the settlement, the FDA agreed to and, with uncharacteristic speed, has already changed its website— dramatically. The Updated June 3, 2008 FDA website now states, for example:
“Dental amalgams contain mercury, which may have neurotoxic effects on the nervous systems of developing children and fetus.” “Pregnant women and persons who may have a health condition that makes them more sensitive to mercury exposure, including individuals with existing high levels of mercury bioburden, should not avoid seeking dental care, but should discuss options with their health practitioner.”

The FDA website also now states that “Some other countries follow a “precautionary principle” and avoid the use of dental amalgam in pregnant women” and provides links to advice about amalgams from regulatory agencies in other countries, including Canada , France and Sweden. These warnings are similar to those sent from the manufacturers. Encapsulated dental amalgam arrives at a dentist’s office with skull and cross bones affixed next to the words “POISON, CONTAINS METALLIC MERCURY.” Amalgam manufacturers – Kerr, Vivadent and Dentsply – advise dentists against placing amalgam in pregnant women, nursing mothers, children under six, and anyone with kidney disease. Dentsply warns: “Contraindication (N.B.: “Contraindication” is a directive to forbid, not just a “warning.”) “In children 6 and under” and “In expectant mothers.” However, these warnings appear not to have been passed to the public, based on the results of a national poll conducted for MPP by Zogby International whereby most Americans (76 percent) don’t know mercury is the primary component of amalgam fillings; 92 percent of Americans overwhelmingly want to be informed of their options with respect to mercury and non-mercury dental filling materials prior to treatment; and 77 percent of Americans would choose higher cost fillings that do not contain mercury if given the choice.

As a result of its findings from a November 14, 2007 hearing at which MPP Director Bender testified, the US House Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is conducting an investigation into the work of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to determine if EPA has underestimated mercury emissions related to dental use of mercury. The Subcommittee’s hearing revealed significant disparities between the agency’s data for mercury emissions related to dental use of mercury and other estimates. EPA has even expressed a lack of confidence in some of its estimates. Furthermore, there are a number of other emissions pathways for which EPA has failed to develop any estimates, as the attached letter from the Subcommittee to EPA Administrator Steve Johnson outlines. It its letter, Chairman Dennis Kucinich requests that EPA provide specific information to the Committee no later than Feb.29, 2008.

The U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will hold a hearing on Wednesday, Nov. 14, to discuss FDA’s responsibility to evaluate the harmful environmental impacts of mercury dental fillings and to question why FDA has not finalized a rule proposed in 2002 to classify mercury tooth fillings under the Medical Device regulations. “The Hearing will show that dental uses contribute to high mercury levels in fish Americans consume,” said MPP Director Michael Bender. “Testimony will also show, for the first time, that dental mercury air emissions may be more than five times higher than recent EPA estimates.” Bender’s testimony comprehensively lays out the extent of the problem, and the need to reduce this pollution source.

Advocates applauded the work of a Vermont House Committee which passed out two important bills on mercury that will significantly reduce pollution. The first requires dentists to have patients sign a consent form before receiving any procedure involving mercury amalgam, which informs them of the potential hazards to human health. The second requires a $5 cash incentive be provided by the manufacturer to contractors that turn in mercury-containing thermostats for recycling. “Informed consent will empower Vermonters to just say no to mercury amalgam, and in the process this will help reduce mercury pollution,” said MPP director Bender in a statement. “It also provides patients with the same information that many dentists have already received from manufacturers, which states that ‘The use of amalgam in contraindicated…In children 6 and under….(and)…. in expectant mothers‘”. The news was picked up in a Vermont newspaper.