I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2101 

To prohibit after 2008 the introduction into interstate commerce of mercury 

intended for use in a dental filling, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 1, 2007 

Ms. WATSON (for herself and Mr. BURTON of Indiana) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To prohibit after 2008 the introduction into interstate commerce of mercury intended for use in a dental filling, 

and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Mercury in Dental Fill5 ings Disclosure and Prohibition Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 (a) GENERAL FINDINGS.—The Congress finds as fol8 lows: 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2101 IH

1 (1) Elemental mercury and mercury compounds 

2 are known to be toxic and hazardous to human 

3 health and to the environment. 

4 (2) Mercury is number three on the 2003 

5 CERCLA Priority List of Hazardous Substances, 

6 behind arsenic and lead. 

7 (3) A dental amalgam, commonly referred to as 

8 a ‘‘silver filling’’, consists of 42 to 58 percent mer9 cury. 

10 (4) Consumers may be deceived by the use of 

11 the term ‘‘silver’’ to describe a dental amalgam, 

12 which contains substantially more mercury than sil13 ver. 

14 (5) Dentists purchase 34 tons of mercury per 

15 year, the Nation’s third largest purchaser of mer16 cury. Dentists place millions of amalgam fillings in 

17 children each year, even though interchangeable sub18 stitutes of non-toxic materials could also fill those 

cavities. Each amalgam filling contains 1⁄2 to 3 19 ⁄4 of 

20 a gram of mercury. 

21 (6) The mercury contained in dental amalgam 

22 is continually emitted in the form of mercury vapor, 

23 and the total amount of mercury released depends 

24 upon the total number of fillings; their age, composi25 tion, and surface area; the intra-oral presence of 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
3 

•HR 2101 IH

1 other metals; dietary and lifestyle habits; and other 

2 chemical and metabolic conditions affecting the 

3 mouth. 

4 (7) When mercury vapors are inhaled, most of 

5 the mercury (about 80 percent) enters the blood6 stream directly through the lungs and then rapidly 

7 deposits preferentially in the brain and kidneys as 

8 well as other parts of the body. 

9 (8) Mercury toxicity is a retention toxicity 

10 (total body burden) that builds up over years of ex11 posure, and is therefore dependent on all sources of 

12 mercury to which an individual may be exposed. 

13 (9) The National Institutes of Health has con14 cluded that when inorganic mercury is located in 

15 brain tissue, researchers are unable to demonstrate 

16 an appreciable half-life, or decrease, of mercury over 

17 time (more than 120 days). The implications of this 

18 conclusion are that dental amalgam exposure will 

19 permanently increase mercury body burden. 

20 (10) According to the World Health Organiza21 tion, the estimated average daily intake and reten22 tion of mercury from dental amalgam ranges from 

23 3 to 27 micrograms per day, and is greater than all 

24 other sources combined. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
4 

•HR 2101 IH

1 (11) The California Dental Association, by 

2 court order, requires postings of warnings about 

3 mercury fillings in California Dental Offices as of 

4 March 9, 2003. The warnings read ‘‘NOTICE TO 

5 PATIENTS: PROPOSITION 65 WARNING: Den6 tal Amalgam, used in many dental fillings, causes 

7 exposure to mercury, a chemical known to the state 

8 of California to cause birth defects or other repro9 ductive harm’’. 

10 (12) United States consumers and parents have 

11 a right to know, in advance, the risks of placing a 

12 product containing a substantial amount of mercury 

13 in their mouths or the mouths of their children. 

14 (13) According to the Agency for Toxic Sub15 stances and Disease Registry, the mercury from 

16 amalgam passes through the placenta of pregnant 

17 women and through the breast milk of lactating 

18 women, increasing health risks to both unborn chil19 dren and newborn babies. 

20 (14) The National Academy of Sciences esti21 mated that ‘‘over 600,000 children are born each 

22 year at risk for adverse neurodevelopmental effects 

23 due to in utero exposure to methyl mercury’’. This 

24 report urged the need to understand the relative 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
5 

•HR 2101 IH

1 amount of mercury attributable to dental amalgam 

2 and to thimerosal in vaccines. 

3 (15) Studies show that a variety of commonly 

4 found human intestinal and oral bacteria can meth5 ylate mercury. In this way, the mercury vapor from 

6 fillings biotransforms into the highly neurotoxic and 

7 teratogenic methylmercury. 

8 (16) The use of mercury in any product being 

9 put into the body is opposed by many health groups, 

10 such as the American Public Health Association, the 

11 California Medical Association, and Health Care 

12 Without Harm. 

13 (17) Highly effective and durable alternatives to 

14 mercury-based dental fillings exist, but many pub15 licly and privately financed health plans do not allow 

16 consumers to choose alternatives to dental amalgam. 

17 (b) ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS.—In addition to the 

18 findings of subsection (a), the Congress finds as follows: 

19 (1) Mercury wastewater released from dental 

20 clinics has been shown to fail the Environmental 

21 Protection Agency’s toxicity characteristic leaching 

22 procedure and, therefore, is regulated as hazardous 

23 waste. 

24 (2) Research from the Naval Dental Research 

25 Institute indicates that, when discharged to the enviVerDate Aug 31 2005 20:34 May 02, 2007 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2101.IH H2101

rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
6 

•HR 2101 IH

1 ronment, conditions may be right for waste dental 

2 mercury to methylate, become bioavailable, and sub3 sequently biomagnify in fish as methyl mercury, the 

4 most toxic form of mercury. 

5 (3) Forty-eight States, the District of Colum6 bia, and the United States Territory of American 

7 Samoa have issued 2,362 fish consumption 

8 advisories to their residents due to mercury contami9 nation. 

10 (4) The Food and Drug Administration has 

11 issued fish consumption advisories due to levels of 

12 mercury in commercially-caught fish and, in Janu13 ary 2001, warned pregnant woman and young chil14 dren not to eat certain marine fish. 

15 (5) According to the Environmental Protection 

16 Agency, United States dentists use approximately 34 

17 tons of mercury per year. 

18 (6) A report issued on June 5, 2002, by the 

19 Mercury Policy Project, the Sierra Club, Health 

20 Care Without Harm, Clean Water Action, and the 

21 Toxics Action Center stated that, because of mer22 cury fillings, dental offices are now the leading 

23 source of mercury in the Nation’s wastewater. 

24 (7) Mercury from dental amalgam can enter the 

25 environment during any point of the product’s lifeVerDate Aug 31 2005 20:34 May 02, 2007 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2101.IH H2101

rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
7 

•HR 2101 IH

1 cycle. This includes placement or removal of fillings; 

2 through bodily excretions; when sewage sludge is in3 cinerated, spread on crops, or dumped in land fills; 

4 when vapor is released or land filled; when vapor is 

5 released directly from the filling (which increases 

6 with brushing, chewing, and consuming hot foods or 

7 salt); and during cremation. Currently there are no 

8 requirements for mercury capture before or during 

9 cremation. 

10 (8) The Association of Metropolitan Sewerage 

11 Agencies reported human wastes from individuals 

12 with dental amalgam fillings to be the most signifi13 cant source of domestic mercury entering publicly 

14 owned treatment works, greater than 80 percent of 

15 the total contributing factors. 

16 (9) According to the Association of Metropoli17 tan Sewerage Agencies, removal of mercury from 

18 publicly owned treatment works has been shown to 

19 cost $10,000,000 to $100,000,000 for every pound 

20 removed. 

21 (10) Mercury use by the dental industry in22 creased from 2 percent in 1980 to 22 percent of the 

23 total use of mercury in the United States in 2001, 

24 because of drastic declines in mercury use by other 

25 industries over that period. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
8 

•HR 2101 IH

1 (11) Amalgam restorations were estimated to 

2 be 55 percent of the total mercury product reservoir 

3 in 2004 by the Environmental Protection Agency, 

4 and will therefore be a source of environmental con5 tamination into the future. 

6 (12) According to a joint study by the Environ7 mental Protection Agency and the Cremation Asso8 ciation of North America, approximately 238 pounds 

9 of mercury, mostly from dental amalgam fillings, 

10 were released from crematoria nationally in 1999. 

11 (13) Cremation is chosen in approximately 30 

12 percent of all deaths, and this percentage is expected 

13 to increase every year. 

14 (14) According to industrial hygiene surveys, 6 

15 to 16 percent of dental offices exceed the exposure 

16 levels for air mercury permitted by Occupational 

17 Safety and Health Administration standards. 

18 SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON INTRODUCTION OF DENTAL 

19 AMALGAM INTO INTERSTATE COMMERCE. 

20 (a) PROHIBITION.—Section 501 of the Federal Food, 

21 Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 351) is amended by 

22 adding at the end the following: 

23 ‘‘(j) Effective January 1, 2009, if it contains mercury 

24 intended for use in a dental filling.’’. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
9 

•HR 2101 IH

1 (b) TRANSITIONAL PROVISION.—For purposes of the 

2 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301 

3 et seq.), effective December 31, 2007, and subject to the 

4 amendment made by subsection (a), a device that contains 

5 mercury intended for use in a dental filling shall be consid6 ered to be misbranded, unless it bears a label that provides 

7 as follows: ‘‘Dental amalgam contains approximately 50 

8 percent mercury, a highly toxic element. Such product 

9 should not be administered to children less than 18 years 

10 of age, pregnant women, or lactating women. Such prod11 uct should not be administered to any consumer without 

12 a warning that the product contains mercury, which is a 

13 highly toxic element, and therefore poses health risks.’’. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS