Mercury fillings are outdated
Toolbox
Published: February 12, 2007
How embarrassing that the state of Vermont has an Acting Health Commissioner who isn't up on the latest dental research, who thinks mercury in the mouth is sometimes "the best clinical choice." I'd like to know when a known poison could ever be the best choice — for poor people? for the uneducated? — or just for the in-a-hurry dentist who might see an extra patient today if he doesn't have to work too carefully on the others? Mercury amalgam is a hazardous material before it goes into your mouth and when it comes out. What could possibly make it safe while it's in your mouth? Even the amalgam manufacturers warn dentists not to use it with pregnant and nursing mothers, children under six and those with kidney problems. Is it okay to poison the rest of us?
Vermont dentists have not been required to have continuing education until this year, 2007. Perhaps they will now learn that Sweden has banned amalgam and one dental school in the Netherlands no longer teaches the use of amalgam because composite fillings (tooth-colored ones) make the teeth stronger and last longer than mercury amalgam fillings and can be used anywhere in the mouth including molars.
This should be cheaper in the long run. Dental seminars are teaching these techniques each year. If we give the dentists four years to catch up on their learning, why would anyone object to legislation that will phase out the use of a dangerous poison, especially our Acting Commissioner of Health?
Lisa Carlson
Hinesburg
42