U.S. Army Captain Michael Kelvington, commander of the Battle company, 1-508 Parachute Infantry battalion, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division, bows next to remains of Gulam Dostager, a member of Afghan Local Police who was killed in the blast of an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) during the joint Tor Janda (Black Flag in Pashtu) operation, in Zahri district of Kandahar province, southern Afghanistan May 25, 2012.  REUTERS/Shamil Zhumatov  (AFGHANISTAN - Tags: MILITARY CIVIL UNREST CONFLICT TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY)

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Members of the U.S. Navy Blue Angels fly over the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan as part of the 25th annual Fleet Week celebration in New York, May 23, 2012.  REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz (UNITED STATES - Tags: MILITARY ANNIVERSARY TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY)

Fleet Week

The U.S. Navy takes Manhattan for a week.  Slideshow 

Photo

The SpaceX mission

A privately owned unmanned rocket blasts off on a mission to be the first commercial flight to the International Space Station.  Slideshow 

FDA panel urges new look at "silver" teeth fillings

Related Topics

GAITHERSBURG, Maryland | Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:50pm EST

GAITHERSBURG, Maryland (Reuters) - Enough uncertainty surrounds silver-colored metal dental fillings with mercury that U.S. regulators should add more cautions for dentists and patients, a U.S. advisory panel said on Wednesday.

While past data has backed the cavity treatment, the fillings should be accompanied by warnings about unknown risks for vulnerable people such as children and pregnant women, the Food and Drug Administration's panel of outside advisers said.

"There really is no place for mercury in children," Suresh Kotagal, a panelist and neurologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, said of the toxic metal.

Metal fillings are used in millions of Americans' teeth to patch decay, but are increasingly being rejected in favor of bone-colored resin that is more eye-pleasing.

Mercury has been linked to neurological damage at high exposure levels and makes up about half of a metal filling.

While the FDA has said no new specific new evidence has emerged about the fillings' safety, the agency wants input on how it assessed the data and drew conclusions after receiving four petitions questioning its 2009 ruling.

While the panel stopped short of urging a ban, it wants the FDA to look at the latest data and reassess its guidance after the agency last year declared the fillings safe.

Their advice follows a divisive two-day public meeting on the FDA's handling of such fillings, also known as dental amalgam.

The FDA could decide to continue backing the metal fillings, urge more cautious use, or ban the products. Some European nations have banned amalgam use.

The agency's actions could affect dental filling makers such as Dentsply International Inc and Danaher Corp's Kerr unit, and distributors such as Henry Schein Inc and Patterson Cos Inc.

Critics told the advisers there was a clear link between mercury fillings and side effects, especially in more vulnerable patients. They should be banned or not implanted unless patients give consent, they said. But some dentists and trade groups said data shows the fillings pose no harm once set in a patient's tooth.

"Dental amalgam is an appropriate option to offer patients," said Leslie Grant, a past president of the National Dental Association, which represents black dentists. Grant added that the cost-effective fillings help prevent further tooth decay or loss in poorer people.

Other dentists testified that mercury was too risky and that they no longer use such filings. Dozens of patients also detailed how their health deteriorated after getting amalgams and urged the panel to push FDA to reverse course and initiate strong warnings, especially for children and pregnant women.

The at-times rancorous public testimony, which drew two police officers as a precaution, elicited applause, boos and even gas mask props from vocal critics.

"The agency so far has taken no steps to protect this most vulnerable population," Sylvia Dove, a member of the group Consumers for Dental Choice, told the panel on Wednesday.

The FDA's advisers were mixed on the benefits and risks of amalgam. Some said data supports it while others said it was unnecessary when alternatives are less risky. Most said it should remain an option as long as patients are clearly told about the risks. Panelists disagreed on whether resins are a costlier and less durable alternative.

They raised questions about older scientific methods used to assess mercury and expressed concern that some studies FDA weighed in making its 2009 ruling were outdated.

"Clearly, FDA needs to take a new look at recent literature," said panelist Judith Zelikoff, an environmental health professor at New York University School of Medicine.

Anthony Watson, head of the FDA's division that oversees dental devices, said officials have grappled with the safety issue for decades. Even if the FDA reviews newer data, "We could end up in the same situation where we are now ... in that the data are inconclusive," he told panelists.

Although the FDA earlier said it would not necessarily take new regulatory action, Watson said the agency was poised to make some decisions soon: "Obviously everybody in this room wants something to happen quickly and so do we."

(Reporting by Susan Heavey. Editing by Tim Dobbyn and Robert MacMillan)

Related Quotes and News

Company
Price
Related News
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
SuefromSault wrote:
AH!! we have proof that Hg is bad. Any mention of it brings out the Hg nuts who are convinced that IT (not their lousy up bringing, or bad genetics, or crappy social milieu) is the cause of all their troubles. (They believe Hg causes autism, it causes them to have kids who’s intelligence has regressed to the mean, it – it what next?) I repeat what I said in an earlier comment. I have had FOUR root canals in the past 2 years because my boob of a dentist insisted on using “more attractive” – and expensive resin fillings instead of amalgam which offers bacterial protection. Amalgam is GOOD for a lot of us and the nuts can just say NO. No one is FORCING them to have amalgam fillings but banning amalgam WILL force the rest of us to use an inferior product. (Maybe someone should ask if the manufacturers of resin are using this to increase profits – How’s that for a conspiracy theory??)

Dec 16, 2010 12:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kburns wrote:
How would Anthony Watson feel about reinstating the previous warnings on the FDA website for Pregnant women and Children 6 and under. These are warnings from the manufacturers. And people on the panel suggested this too. I attended the hearing, time was spent on the wording on the label of the container the amalgam comes in. Patients never see this container, it is kept in a closet. I worked for 24 yrs in the opertory with the dentist, I never saw the label, the amalgam was put in the room by someone else. If I saw the warning, next to the skull and crossbones I might have been more careful. I think at the very least the FDA needs to make this information available so people can make informed choices. I have mercury poisoning, it is a slow long death. I thought that I was protected by the FDA and OSHEA, I learned my lesson the hard way! And now I am paying the price. So much has been talked about how poorly the government is running these days yet people still trust “FDA APPROVED”

Dec 17, 2010 2:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.