Congressman Burton's Statement- Congressional Hearings
on Mercury
Updated January 31, 2009
On May 8, 2003 I attended the hearings in Washington D.C. conducted by
Congressman Dan Burton R-Indiana) and Congresswoman Diane Watson
(D-California). These hearings were part of the Committee on Government
Reform, Subcommittee on Human Rights and Wellness, a Subcommittee
Hearing entitled "Consumer Choice and Implementing Full disclosure in
Dentistry." This was the second hearing on dental mercury.
The first hearing of the Government Reform Committee, "Mercury in
Dental amalgams: An Examination of the Science" was held November 14,
2002. You can access transcripts of the 2002 hearings at the Government
Printing office website. The link to
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-107hhrg10784699/pdf/CHRG-107hhrg10784699.pdf is below.
Mercury in Dental Amalgams: An Examination of the Science
Burton said his commitee started doing this investigation
into mercury in 1999 when he started examining the use of
mercury [thimerosal] in baby vaccines. He said this was
a "no win situation for the child and family," because
the state mandates shots for the child before going to
school.
Burton said his grandson Christian became
profoundly autistic overnight. He developed autism
at the age of 18 months after taking the MMR vaccine and
other shots. (The MMR does not contain mercury.)
Burton said that his grandson received nine vaccines that
day and six of them contained mercury. (In a former SafeMinds.org
article, his granddaughter Burton said, also had a close
encounter with death due to the Hepatitis B vaccine.)
Burton said the incidence of autism used to be 1 in 10,000
twenty years ago, but now was 1 in 250.
Congressman Burton vowed, "We are not going away. We are going to keep
on collecting evidence and holding hearings. Then we are going to
publish the evidence. What I want to know is why can't the the NIH and
the ADA find a connection between mercury and health effects? Sweden
found 700 credible papers about the harmful effects of mercury, but the
NIH and the ADA can't find one."
This following is the statement released by Congressman Burton previous to the hearings. He read from this statement on May 8th.
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Committee on Government Reform
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-6143
TOM DAVIS, VIRGINIA (CHAIRMAN)
HENRY A. WAXMAN, CALIFORNIA (RANKING MINORITY MEMBER)
Majority (202)225-5074
Minority (202) 225-5051
- To: Members, Subcommittee on Human Rights and Wellness
- From: Dan Burton, Chairman
- Date: May 5, 2003
- Subject: Subcommittee Hearing entitled, "Consumer Choice and
Implementing Full Disclosure in Dentistry."
- Thursday, May 8, 2003, 2 PM
- 2154 Rayburn House Office Building
The Subcommittee on Human Rights and Wellness will hold an oversight
hearing on Thursday, May 8, 2003 in 2154 Rayburn House Office Building
at 2 PM, entitled, "Consumer Choice and Implementing Full Disclosure in
Dentistry."
BACKGROUND
The Subcommittee is continuing an investigation into medical
and dental exposures to mercury that was initiated by the
full Government Reform committee during the 107th congress.
Previously, the Committee reviewed concerns about thimerosal
in vaccines and its links to developmental, speech, and
language delays. It also examined mercury in dental
amalgams and their health implications.
This hearing will focus primarily upon new information
relating to possible health implications of mercury in
the human body, and upon disclosing adequate information
to patients to enable them to make informed choices about
the type of dental restorative material that is used in
their treatment.
Mercury is one of the most toxic minerals found in nature,
second only to radioactive materials. Dental amalgam
consists of a mixture of powdered metals (alloy) and
liquid mercury, with mercury constituting 50 percent or
slightly more of the amalgam by weight. After the
ingredients are mixed and inserted into a cavity, the
mixture quickly hardens. For many years it was thought
that after amalgamation, the mercury was permanently
bound to the other ingredients and was rendered inert.
However, during the last 30 plus years, scientists have
come to realize that small amounts of mercury continuously
leach from amalgams, and that the leaching may go on for
many years.
It should be noted that mercury is an element. It cannot
be broken down or changed into a different substance.
Whether in its vapor, liquid, or solid form, mercury is
still mercury.
The human body does not have an effective filter or
elimination system for mercury, since it is a substance
that humans were not designed to ingest. Moreover,
mercury in the human body accumulates over time.
The most common sources of human mercury toxicity are
through vaccinations, dental amalgams, and fish consumption.
Unfortunately, most of the Federal government's attention
seems to have been focused on the hazards of fish
consumption, rather than on the hazards of vaccinations
and amalgams. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and many state
government agencies have issued frequent warnings that
vulnerable populations, such as pregnant and lactating
women and young children, should limit their consumption
of fish from mercury-polluted waters. Those warnings are
entirely appropriate.
But United States government agencies seem to have been
far less vigilant in their efforts to examine the health
implications of mercury-containing vaccinations and
amalgams, in spite of growing evidence that those
sources of mercury may contribute to a substantial
array of tragic problems, and very likely add more
mercury burden to the average American body than any
other source.
Mercury toxicity has been linked to tremors, attention
deficit disorder (ADD), attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder (ADHD), autism, Alzheimer's disease (AD),
cardiovascular problems, fertility problems, impairment
of kidney function, impairment of the immune system,
impairment of fetal development, modest declines in
intelligence quotient (IQ), and death.
Mercury is especially neurotoxic to the development
brains of fetuses and young children. Mercury from
mothers is passed through the placenta to the unborn
baby, and some of that mercury may accumulate in the
brain. After birth, breast-feeding can continue the
bioaccumulation process. Neurological development
continues through all of the first decade of life and
well into the second decade. That is why various
health warnings reference children age 14 and under.
Regardless of the source, neurological and renal problems
can result from mercury in human cells. When speaking of
the health consequences of mercury in the environment on
May 1, 2003 in the Dirksen Senate Office Building,
noted pediatrician Dr. Katherine Shea, M.D., M.P.H.,
F.A.A.P. said:
"All forms of mercury are toxic. It
is a poison in all of its forms. There is no good mercury."
1
In response to a question she went on to
explain that mercury damage lasts a lifetime. She stated:
"You can't take a pill and fix it."
2
A January of 2003 report by the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) found that 1 in 12 women
of childbearing age has mercury levels above the
EPA-safe threshold of 5.8 parts per million in their
blood. That could put as many as 320,000 newborns at
risk of neurological effects from being exposed
in utero.
3
A study by the National Research Council Committee on
the Toxicological Effects of Methylmercury reviewed the
epidemiological and toxicology literature up to the year
2000. The report came up with the much lower estimate
that 60,000 U. S. newborns annually are at risk for
neurodevelopmental effects due to in utero mercury
exposure.
Whether the number is 60,000 or 320,000 or some number
in between, that is a tragic number of babies to put
at risk, especially since most of that risk can be
avoided.
Some recent developments are noteworthy.
The FDA has decided to adopt the EPA reference dose
for mercury body burden-the theoretical amount that
the typical person con tolerate without any discernable
harm. That represents a four-fold decrease in the FDA
estimate.
The Swedish Dental Material Commission released a report
last week authored by Dr. Maths Berlin, Ph. D., who
was the former Chair of the World Health Organization
(WHO) International project on Chemical Safety. The
report entitled "Mercury in Dental-Filling
Materials-An Updated Risk Analysis in Environmental
Medical Terms" involved a review of 936 scientific
papers, of which just over 700 were deemed to be
credible. All of the papers were recent, having been
published between 1997 through 2002.
Among other things, the report indicated that
previous estimates of a safety margin of mercury in
the human body were wrong-harm may occur in vulnerable
individuals at much lower levels than previously thought.
A conclusion of the report stated:
"With reference to
the fact that mercury is a multipotent toxin with effects
on several levels of the biochemical dynamics of the cell,
amalgam must be considered to be an unsuitable material
for dental restoration. This is especially true since
fully adequate and less toxic alternatives are available."
4
The report also states:
"With reference to the risk
of inhibiting influence on the growing brain, it is not
compatible with science and tested experience to use
amalgam fillings in children and fertile women."
5
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
announced in April, 2003, that lead may impair
children's intelligence at far lower levels of exposure
than those in current Federal health guidelines, meaning that
potentially millions of additional U. S. children than was previously
thought may have lower IQs from ingesting contaminated dust.
A study conducted by Dr. Mark Geier, which was published
in the peer-reviewed Journal of American Physicians
and Surgeons, concludes that there has been a
documented increase in neurodevelopmental disorders
following the use of vaccines containing thimerosal.
According to Dr. Geier:
"The amount of mercury in
thimerosal in childhood vaccines far exceeds Federal
safety guidelines...A causal relationship between
childhood vaccines containing thimerosal and
neurodevelopmental disorders and heart disease
appears to be confirmed."
Independent research conducted by Dr. Boyd Haley
and Dr. James Adams indicated that autistic children
represent a subpopulation that cannot effectively
excrete mercury from their bodies, and are therefore
very susceptible to the toxic methyl-mercury exposure
presented during routine childhood vaccinations.
More has been learned about the synergistic effects
that can result when multiple heavy metals, such as
both lead and mercury, are ingested by the same person.
That subject will be covered more in-depth in the
Subcommittee hearing.
A recent court order in California requires
implementation of a Proposition 65 warning, to
be prominently posted in dental clinics with
more than 9 employees. It states:
"Amalgam,
used in many dental fillings, causes exposure
to mercury, a chemical known to the state of
California to cause birth defects or other
reproductive harm. Root canal treatments and
restorations, including fillings, crowns and
bridges, use chemicals known to the state of
California to cause cancer. The U.S. Food and
Drug Administration has studies the situation
and approved for use all dental restorative
materials. Consult your dentist to determine
which materials are appropriate for your treatment."
Proposition 65 was adopted by the voters of
California in 1986, but it took 17 years to
implement in dental offices, and that happened
only as a result of a successful lawsuit.
California's "Watson Law" (1992) still has not
been implemented. It requires the California Dental
Board to prepare and distribute a fact sheet about
the risks and efficacies of dental fillings. When
the board still had not complied in 2001, nine years
after enactment of the law, the public outcry led
the legislature to shut down the board and create a
new one. The new board held hearings on the safety
of mercury-containing fillings in 2002, but once
again has bogged down as the California Dental
Association argues against effective disclosure
of risks.
There have been major disagreements as to whether
state dental boards impose a so called "Gag Rule"
on dentist that prohibits them from initiating
conversations with patients about the potential
removal of amalgams. Although the ADA denies that
there is such a rule, many dentist say that is
very real and is strictly enforced by state dental
boards. Mercury-free dentists contend that they
cannot compete openly, as they are not allowed to
advertise that they offer "mercury-free" fillings.
The "Gag Rule" that inhibits dentists from discussing
the potential health risks of amalgam was first
inserted into the ADA Code of Ethics while an ADA
subsidiary held the patent on amalgam. This
raises strong First Amendment issues, and the
Attorneys General of Iowa, Oregon, and Minnesota
have ruled that the ADA gag rule may not be
enforced in their states.
Amalgams typically are referred to as "Silver"
fillings. While they are silver in color, and
there is some silver in the alloy portion of
the amalgam, the name obscures the fact that
"silver" fillings are 50% or more mercury.
The first state that successfully passed a full
disclosure law and properly implemented it is
Maine. Former State Senate president, present-day
Congressman Michael Michaud (ME-02), wrote a
disclosure statute in 2001, then oversaw its
implementation by the Maine Department of health
in 2002. A booklet designed for dental patients
advises consumers that the main ingredient of amalgam
fillings is mercury, and that it has potential health
risks and significant environmental consequences.
Proposition 65, the so-called "Gag Rule," and
informed consent will be discussed at the Subcommittee
hearing.
Finally, there is considerable concern about
economically-disadvantaged persons for whom no
dental choice exists. For most families on
Medicaid, the choice is "mercury fillings or
no fillings at all" in their teeth. Many
moderate-income consumers face almost as bad
a situation. Insurance often covers only mercury
fillings, forcing those who cannot afford to pay
out-of-pocket to accept mercury in their mouths.
In view of recent advances in science, it is time
to fully inform the American public about the risks,
as well as the benefits, of various dental
restorative materials. It also may be time to
move on to safer alternatives.
Legislation
During the 107th Congress, Ms. Watson of California
(for herself and Mr. Burton of Indiana) introduced
H.R. 4163, the Mercury in Dental Filling Disclosure
and Prohibition Act, also referred to as the
Watson-Burton Bill. This bill was designed to
amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
to ban mercury-containing amalgams intended for
use in dental fillings effective January 1, 2007.
A transitional provision also would have required
a label that disclosed:
"Dental amalgam contains
approximately 50 percent mercury, a highly toxic
element. Such product should not be administered
to children less than 18 years of age, pregnant
women, or lactating women. Such product should not
be administered go any consumer without a warning
that he product contains mercury, which is a highly
toxic element, and therefore poses health risks."
(Editor's note: A revised version of the bill, HR 1680, was reintroduced
in the 108th Congress. In the 109th Congress
HR 4011
was
reintroduced with many added sponsorers. HR 4011 also includes
environmental issues that are related to the use of dental amalgam.
HR 4011 can be read at
http://thomas.loc.gov
The name of the bill remains the same-"Mercury in Dental
Filling Disclosure and Prohibition Act." Type in
HR 4011
to see the bill.
(January 2009 editor's note) HR 4011 is no longer the number of the bill
as it changes with each new session of Congress. One of the best ways
to keep up with the newest number is to go to the Library of Congress
website (http://thomas.loc.gov) that I linked to above, and type in the
search box "mercury." If you do an
advanced search
and put
Congresswoman Diane Watson from California as one of the sponsors, you
will most likely find the latest legislation or resolutions concerning
dental mercury.
1 Response to a question at The Environment & Health Forumm
presentation in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on May 1, 2003
entitled, "Public Health Implications of Mercury: Protecting the Health
of Children and Other Vulnerable Populations."
2 Ibid.
3 Centers for Disease Control, January 2003,
Second National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals.
4
Mercury in Dental_Filling materials_An Updated Risk Analysis in Environmental Medical Terms
, by Maths Berlin, The Dental Material Commission of Sweden.
5 Ibid.
Witnesses
Panel One
Dr. Fritz Lorscheider, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Medial Physiology & Biophysics
University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Dr. Boyd Haley, Ph. D., Professor and Chair, Department of Chemistry
University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY
Dr. Maths Berlin, Professor Emeritus, Environmental Medicine
University of Lund, Sweden and
Past Chair, Internation Project of Chemical Safety,
World Health Organization
Dr. Frederick C. Eichmiller, D.D.S., Director, American Dental Association Health Foundation
Paffenbarger Research Center, National Bureau of Standards and Technology
Gaithersburg, MD
Panel Two
Sandra Duffy, Esq., Founding member, Consumers of Dental Choice Northwest
Lake Oswego, OR
Congressman Mike Michaud (ME-02)
Member of Congress, Second district of Maine
Dr. Chester Yokoyama, D.D.S., Member, Dental Board of California
Los Angeles
Mr. Emmitt Carlton, Immediate Past President, Alexandria Virginia Chapter,
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
Alexandria, VA
