By Christopher A. Bomba, Esquire

E-mail: cabomba@citcom.net

The amalgam debate is both scientific and political.  There are highly trained and intelligent experts on both sides.  It is not merely a debate between those who understand the scientific method and those who do not. In fact those who might try to convince you otherwise are using a form of argumentative propaganda.  This ploy involves choosing a phrase, scientific method, which has a generally accepted positive connotation, and fortuitously associating oneself with it.  The truth is that the scientific method gets used and abused for all manner of ends.  For example, in the silicone breast implant litigation slews of experts were produced at a variety of trials who gave highly conflicting opinions on the underlying scientific issues.  These were all people highly trained in the "scientific method." An awful lot of people with MD, DDS or PhD at the ends of their names have concluded that mercury amalgams are dangerous to the health. Many others still think they are safe.  Thus we have a growing scientific debate.

It is also important to remember that this debate is political.  By political I mean that there is a lot more at stake than an esoteric scientific idea.  Obviously thousands of dentists have their fortunes as well as their self respect at risk.  An entire industry may be disrupted or dismembered if the amalgams are proven dangerous.  The manufacturers are only a small part of this industry.  This industry is composed of every dentist who has ever potentially poisoned people by implanting mercury in their mouths as well as their lobbyists and their supporters in the medical profession.  The ADA would be devastated by the undermining of its credibility, and the FDA would have a heck of a time explaining to the public why it "grandfathered" in the use of mercury amalgams without the vigorous proof of safety now required of new devices.  There are potentially millions of people who have been harmed. And thus we can see why this debate is so heated.

This amalgam affray will draw in a variety of people with differing agendas.  For example, I recently saw here a letter from a MD with an internet organization called "Quackbusters."  The name this organization has chosen is of course designed to imply that those with whom they disagree are quacks.  After reviewing their website it seems to me that they view everyone involved in the health field who is not part of the most conservative medical establishment to be quacks.  They appear to have overlooked a wide variety of scientific data supporting various alternative health practices some of which are licensed in many states, such as acupuncture, chiropractic, and homeopathy.  Their ultra conservative position on all health issues diminishes greatly the credibility of their position on amalgams.  Their positions seem to flow outward from a particular political agenda rather than from thorough review of data.

Predictions?  In the coming decade as evidence of the danger of mercury amalgams accumulates, we will see an explosion of litigation similar to that associated with asbestos, silicone implants and tobacco cigarettes. Eventually, perhaps in ten to twenty years, mercury amalgams will be banned in the United States.   In the meantime being a prudent and wily lawyer with few other options, I have taken the mounting evidence so seriously as to have my amalgams removed.  I am currently engaged in an intensive detoxification program, with some positive results.

We shall see what we shall see.