The ADA will have none of this. It says 150 years of dentistry show that the amalgams are not a problem, as evidenced by the dentists themselves who spend a career around these products. Individual dentists in Maine, however, sometimes tell a different story. They note that the alternatives to the mercury amalgams are more expensive but that they are safer for their patients, themselves and their staff, and for the environment. The Legislature s job in this case is not to start an argument among dentists but to look at the relative risk of mercury to the public and the level of importance of dental amalgams in contributing to that risk.
Mercury can be toxic to the nervous system.
U.S. dentists, according to the U.S. Geological Survey, annually use a total of be-tween 40 and 60 metric tons of mercury in their practices but other sources have attracted the attention of regulators. Bills in Congress would more tightly regulate mercury emissions from power plants and incinerators, would reduce mercury in light bulbs and eliminate it in thermometers, switches and other household products. Rep. Tom Allen, who has followed the mercury issue closely, will reintroduce a mercury-reduction bill after the congressional break that for the first time encourages states, communities, dentists and dental associations to work toward eliminating the mercury filling. The potential for environmental damage alone would make mercury from dental offices endangered. A fair review of the studies of its human health effects by the Bureau of Health would take only several months.