From: BULLELKMAN@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 1:59 AM
To: FDADockets@oc.fda.gov; brownchas@erols.com
Cc: sandyduffy@comcast.net; FreKoss@aol.com
Subject: Docket Number # 03N-0169

Dear FDA,

 

Please post this e-mail to Docket Number # 03N-0169.  It is imperative that this important information becomes part of public record on mercury dental fillings. By recording this e-mail to Docket Number #03N-0169, it becomes information that will be available to the "public" to include the American public, elected officials and the media because of Freedom of Information Act.

 

It is critical that the "public" has access to this information.

 

Thank you, 

Mary Ann Newell

Manager of the Files for Consumers for Dental Choice

Consumers for Dental Choice

1725 K St., N.W., Suite 511

Washington, DC 20006

Ph. 202.822-6307; fax 822-6309

www.toxicteeth.org

 

Case #2004-99: Fifth submission to OMA Director Servis:

---------------------------------------

 

Complaint re Case No. 2004-99:

Tabak Using Undue Influence To Derail Investigation
 

            Using his powerful position as Director of the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, Lawrence Tabak has embarked on an extraordinary course of action to trivialize and even derail the above investigation.

 

            Such actions were culminated in the past week, as LSRO  given the green light from Tabaks staff, who provided a status report on a confidential investigation[1]  released its bogus report on mercury fillings.  Instead of being presented as a scientific paper, it was unveiled as a media event, with hired press relations and a headline to maximize press attention; this aggressive press effort by LSRO was closely coordinated with Tabaks ally the American Dental Association. 

 

Tabak himself participated in this media offensive to promote mercury fillings.   Amazingly, Tabak used the occasion to defend the process, the very topic under investigation.  According to both the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and San Diego Union Tribune reporting:

Lawrence Tabak, NIDCR director, said the report was conducted fairly and independently.

 

            Repeat:  while his conduct for handpicking LSRO and covering up the process is under investigation (Case No. 2004-99), Tabak goes to the media to pronounce the process clean.   It is an old trick by public officials who know the press will quote them:  they can end-run the investigative process by convincing press and  public there is no case to be made.  The public may expect such shenanigans from the town aldermen, but for the head of an institute of NIH, such manipulation is excusable.

 

            Tabak is using his visible position to try his case in the press, deceptively proclaiming an untainted report.  But Tabak well knows this contractual process was never independent:  his own assistant handpicked the contractor with no competitive bid, chose a contractor with a history of picking biased panels and getting pro-sponsor results, and wrote out the desired results in the first several drafts of the contract.

 

            Tabaks close ties to organized dentistry should make his moves suspect.  The American Dental Association has financial contracts with mercury amalgam manufacturers under which the ADA agrees to promote its use.  Thus, Tabaks actions directly undermine the rigorous standards for NIH reports. Should Tabak, or Braveman, or Blevins, or LSRO, or BETAH  or all of them  be found to have violated the law or violated NIH policies, the report would have to be re-done.  But this unauthorized release and the press offensive by Tabak, LSRO and the ADA means the damage has been done  the public has been told mercury fillings are safe, and children and pregnant women will get mercury exposure when in Canada, much of Europe, and parts of Asia, they are warned to avoid mercury fillings. 

 

Tabaks behavior this week is not isolated, but part of a months-long cover-up to hide that it was NIDCR, not BETAH, who handpicked LSRO.  

  a.. Tabak testified deceptively in a letter to Congress that BETAH identified LSRO.  Actually, it was NIDCR  a point Tabak was ccd on. 
  b.. Tabaks staff provided a false status report to LSRO that the investigation would end in November, at which point LSRO immediately announced that it would release the report. 
    a.. To provide a status report to a target is against the rules of a federal investigation. 
    b.. To provide a false status report was a signal to LSRO to release the report.
  c.. Under the contract, BETAH required approval of its work by NIDCR before it could publish, suggesting NIDCR colluded in engineered the release.
  a.. Tabak has successfully end-run Director Zerhouni, springing a report favorable to mercury fillings while the rest of the world is protecting pregnant women and children from this dangerous and unnecessary exposure to mercury.  
  b.. In a blatant conflict of interest, instead of recusing himself, Tabak is fulfilling the agenda of organized dentistry, from whence he comes. 
 

With impunity, Lawrence Tabak has used his high position to (1) deceive Congress, (2) end-run the Directors office, and (3) mislead the American people through a press statement.  When it comes to mercury fillings, both science and integrity pale in comparison to Tabak aiding and abetting the agenda of organized dentistry.

 

It is hard to imagine, at this point, that the Directors office can now do a fair and complete investigation of the director of this rogue Institute.

 

Consumers for Dental Choice lacks confidence in the integrity of the process, and joins Senator Lautenberg in urging an immediate referral of this case to the Inspector General.

 

Charles G. Brown

December 13, 2004

  

Attachment:  Third submission to Case No. 2004-99



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] See our third submission, dated November 16 (attached)