ADA Left Holding the Bag in Dental Lab Controversy
When Scandal Strikes, Some Bury Their Heads in the Sand
Dentists and dental labs have been in the spotlight recently due to the news of lead-tainted dental products like crowns and bridges. Right now, we don’t know if it’s a widespread problem, whose fault it might be, or whose job it is to resolve this whole mess.
Though the story broke a few months ago, there’s been precious little actual information released on the subject. So what’s going on behind the scenes? Let’s examine the paper trail… You have to read between the lines a little, but it’s frightening how no agency seems willing to take responsibility for this public health hazard.
The correspondence starts on March 6, when the American Dental Association (ADA) sent nearly identical letters to both the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Does this circle of ineptitude remind you of anything?
Here’s what the ADA had to say to the CDC: (PDF)
“Staff members from the ADA… have been in contact with the CDC’s Oral Health Division. We are undertaking our own efforts to study the problem, including random, objective testing of prosthetics from both overseas and domestic labs and will be happy to share that information with the CDC. Of course, any such testing by the ADA is no substitute for the CDC and other government agencies performing their mandated functions to protect the health and safety of the public.
“Although we are not aware of any risk to health based on the small amount of information available, we and our patients are looking to CDC to affirm that this is true or, if it is not, take the appropriate steps to protect the public. Accordingly, we request that the CDC keep the ADA informed of its efforts to identify the extent of the potential contamination and the health effects of lead in dental prosthetics as well as any CDC plans for action.”
The ADA wrote the same thing to the FDA. (PDF)
“Staff members from the ADA divisions of Science and Government and Public Affairs already have been in contact with the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health Dental Devices Branch…. Of course, any testing by the ADA is no substitute for the FDA and other government agencies performing their mandated functions to protect the health and safety of the public.”
Let me translate: “”The ADA is doing our own research, but it’s really the FDA’s or CDC’s job to determine if this is a problem and what we should do next.”" The ADA’s point is legitimate; a professional organization should not be expected to provide the same public health services as the government.
On March 18, the ADA again wrote to virtually identical letters to both the FDA (PDF) and CDC (PDF).
“Media reports on ‘contaminated’ dental materials produced in foreign dental laboratories have become more frequent. The reports have an increasingly alarming tone and a sense of urgency since we first wrote to you on March 6. As a result, dentists are fielding more inquiries from concerned patients and there are disquieting reports of patients declining recommended treatment because of unsubstantiated fears.
“We are eager to understand the extent of any problems with dental materials, whether they are produced in foreign or domestic dental laboratories. In particular, we ask that you provide some context for claims of possible health impacts of lead in dental prosthesis in the amounts reported in the media. While recognizing that much remains to be learned about this issue, some general information from the CDC/FDA about the likelihood of harm would be of great interest to both dentists and patients and should come from the federal agency whose mission is to protect the public’s health.
“We also look to your agency to reassure patients that recommended dental treatment should not be ignored. The ADA is asking both the CDC and the FDA to consider providing a media update that will reassure the public that government agencies are taking appropriate steps to protect dental patients and that oral health care should not be postponed.”
Let’s translate that again: “Hey, guys, this goes beyond the scope of the ADA’s job… Can the government please offer some guidance?”
On April 14, the FDA responded to the ADA.
“The FDA is taking this report very seriously. FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) is also working to obtain information on the presence of lead in dental prosthetics.
“At this time, FDA will not be issuing a consumer update; however, the agency will consider further actions after careful examination of the scientific evidence.”
Translation: “Sorry ADA, the FDA has nothing to say on the topic. Ask us again later.”
On April 17, the CDC replied to the ADA’s letters.
“Thank you for your correspondence regarding media reports about the lead content in a dental prosthesis made in a dental laboratory in China. The CDC became aware of this issue through conversations with staff at the ADA’s Divisions of Science and Government and Public Affairs and through media interest in this story.
“As you indicated, the FDA has regulatory authority over dental products, including dental prosthetic materials, and for the registration of foreign laboratories that import dental products into the United States. It is our understanding that the FDA is already acting on this information, At this time, CDC has had no formal request for any type of engagement from a state of local health authority.
“Although CDC has no specific information regarding the case to which you refer, we can provide you with some general information on lead exposure. Many consumer products contain lead in trace amounts, and federal regulations limit the amount of lead in consumer products… Certainly, CDC recommends against the unnecessary use of lead in consumer products, including dental crowns.
“The recent media reports of lead in dental porcelain/metal crowns suggest a level of approximately 200 parts per million. Such small amounts of lead as reported, however, are extremely unlikely to cause adverse health effects in adults because the dental products wear out slowly, so the lead would be released in tiny amounts over time. Even at an increased rate, it is highly unlikely that this amount would be a health risk to an adult.
“It is our understanding that testing for potential leaching of lead from these products is being conducted in ADA laboratories. CDC would be happy to assist ADA in interpreting the health impact of the testing of dental porcelains/meals that is currently underway. CDC will also provide any support if requested from the FDA, as that agency conducts further testing of these products.”
Translation: “It’s the FDA’s job, not the CDC’s. Maybe it’s the ADA’s job, but definitely not the CDC’s. And the amount of lead in dental prostheses is probably safe.”
Are you as amazed by what you’re reading as me?!? Here are a few of the most bothersome points:
-
“It is our understanding that testing for potential leaching of lead from these products is being conducted in ADA laboratories,” writes the CDC, suggesting that it is the ADA’s responsibility to monitor the safety of dental products. The ADA is a private, voluntary professional organization funded by dues from member dentists. Testing and regulation is the government’s job, not the ADA’s.
The ADA points this out in their initial letter, saying that “testing by the ADA is no substitute for the FDA, CDC and other government agencies performing their mandated functions to protect the health and safety of the public.”
-
“The CDC became aware of this issue through conversations with staff at the ADA and through media interest in this story,” wrote the CDC.
Really?!? Why was the ADA the one to bring this issue to the CDC’s attention? Does the CDC only investigate health threats that receive media attention?
-
“At this time, FDA will not be issuing a consumer update; however, the agency will consider further actions after careful examination of the scientific evidence,” says the FDA.
The FDA took over a month to respond to the ADA. The organization in charge of regulating dental materials (you know, making sure they’re safe and lead-free) hasn’t offered the public any guidance on this threat.
The CDC’s passing the buck to the FDA, and the FDA doesn’t appear to be doing much of anything. But dentists are worried, patients are panicking, and public is desperate to know more. As the public face of dentistry in the US, the ADA is now forced to stand in for do-nothing government agencies. Doctors, it’s time to put on your hip-high waders… it is going to get really deep before anyone in the government takes action or gives definitive guidance.
Want to catch up on our coverage of this story?
- Dentists: Do You Trust Your Dental Lab? (5/13)
- Lead in Dental Products Continues to Worry Dentists (4/29)
- Dentists and Dental Labs Subject of New Legislation (4/09)
- Dentists Speak Out on Foreign Dental Lab Work (4/02)
- Lead in Dental Crowns from China: Whose Fault Is It? (4/01)
- Dental Labs in China: How Much Do You Really Know? (3/25)
- Dental Labs: Lead Content a Prescription for Disaster (3/19)
- The Sickening News about Tainted Dental Lab Work (3/12)
Stay updated by
subscribing
to our RSS feed.
You can leave a response or
trackback.





May 21st, 2008 at 9:44 am
Dear Jim,
Should we really be surprised about how this is being handled, given the track record/make up of the groups involved? On the one hand we have our ever trustworthy government agencies whose altruistic goal is to take care of the people, whose performance is impeccable both in its efficiency and its efficacy. Ok, I don’t believe that either. On the other we have our own ADA, the trade organization whose function is above the influence of corporate involvement and who has been doing a great job of representing the causes of the dental community. Ok, I also don’t believe that one. So what’s the answer? Personal responsibility in this particular issue could play a major role. Go to your labs, meet the owners, inspect their workplace/workers. Does this guaranty that you are free from problems/worry? Of course not. Should you trust your instincts, ability to research the issues (especially now that the internet makes it easy to find a broad spectrum of perspectives on any issue, including material toxicity), and judgment on the final decision on what you think is best for for your patients? You bet. At least more than the agencies involved in this issue. Are there times we have no choice but to trust them? Yes. However in situations such as this where your ability to play a major role in deciding the quality of materials that go in your patient’s mouths, if I were your patient I would prefer to trust you vs. any agency. As it should be.
Mike Pacifico
May 23rd, 2008 at 11:05 am
Dear Jim:
What is your evidence for “…patients are panicking and public is desperate to know more?” I appreciate that you performed a survey of your subscribing dentists. That apparently indicated,”…dentists are worried.” I am concerned, definitely not worried, from reading every conclusion you’ve printed about the scientific analysis that all levels of lead measured will not cause clinical effects. I AM concerned about public and patients’ perceptions, certainly. It is our duty as scientifically-educated professionals to evaluate real risks to patients. Our words should NOT create anxiety (irrational fear) among our patients when the evidence so far indicates no harm. Concern and thoughtfulness, rather than panic or desperation, should motivate our investigation of whether real risks threaten patient’s health.
Thank you very much for your following this developing story. I’m getting more from your website than any other source.
May 23rd, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Byron,
The last thing I want to do is create an undue panic. However, as the story receives more media attention, I have heard anecdotal reports of panicked patients ready to remove all their dental work.
Of course such panic is unwarranted. However, there’s also real cause for concern. Yes, the CDC estimates that the amount of lead in a tainted dental crown would not cause harm. Yet some of these crowns are testing at many times the international standard for lead content in paint.
You can make a scientific argument on both sides. (It’s the same thing with mercury, fluoride, and BPA.) I do not pretend to be a scientist. All I want to do is provide information on a topic about which it’s surprisingly hard to find information.
Jim Du Molin
August 7th, 2008 at 5:46 am
What about the lead in Sargenti Paste….a root canal material that is sealed within the tooth…NOT TO MENTION THE FORMALDEHYDE. For decades (about 4), the FDA, ADA, State Pharmacy Boards and State Dental Boards have ignored the use of this dangerous root canal material. It is all but illegal in this country, and still our regulatory boards turn a blind eye and wait until someone shows up injured before they do anything…and “anything” isn’t much. Most dental professionals are not even aware that this stuff is being used and don’t know to look for it. Regardless of what the proponents say, this stuff causes nerve damage, bone infections and even anaphylactic shock. If you can die from anaphylactic shock (and you can), you can die from a Sargenti Paste root canal. Not only is the formaldehyde an allergen but so is the peanut oil that is often included.
Last attempt to get this FDA approved was in 1993 and they were TURNED DOWN BY THE FDA. Read the transcript and you will see why (http://www.dentalwatch.org/questionable/sargenti/hearing(1993).rtf starts around page 14), yet it continues. Since the use is often concealed, there is no way to know how many people are injured by it. Injuries can be severe and often permanent.