A federal judge in Connecticut has ordered the state of Connecticut to stop harassing Dr. Mark Breiner for criticizing mercury amalgam fillings. Breiner may now advertise and advocate mercury-free dentistry in any public forum, and state why they are such a horrid health risk. The case was decided in First Amendment grounds.
The ADA's Code of Professional Conduct states: "Based on available scientific data, the ADA has determined that the removal of amalgam restorations from the non-allergic patient for the alleged purpose of removing toxic substances from the body, when such treatment is performed solely at the recommendation or suggestion of the dentist, is improper and unethical."
Although a patient is legally entitled to information regarding the risks and benefits of proposed and alternative treatments, the ADA and state dental boards have vehemently resisted informing patients about the risks of mercury amalgams and have been disciplining dentists who advocate against mercury amalgams.
Dr. Wayne Myles from Herndon, Virginia received a letter from the Board of Dentistry accusing him of making false, misleading and deceptive advertising claims by publishing an article called "The Failing Amalgam" in a supplement to the Washington Post called "Dentalife.
Legal implications for dentists using the amalgam fillings are mounting. Evidence of amalgam toxicity and the availability of safer alternative materials, arguably, substantially increases the liability of the ADA and pro-amalgam dentists. One attorney has predicted that mass tort litigation from amalgam poisonings will soon become a "major courtroom event
Mercuryexposure.info was created and is maintained by consumers injured from exposure to mercury vapor and particles released by their dental amalgam fillings during placement, polishing, removal and day to day use. We are dedicated to providing accurate, up to date information on the many facets of dental mercury amalgam fillings.