February 21, 2007
Our organization is committed to ending the use of mercury in dentistry; accordingly, we petition, appear before, and evaluate dental boards coast to coast. Without equivocation, I can say that the Maryland dental board is one of the three worst dental boards in the nation.
- Only the Maryland dental board retains the notorious “gag rule” instructing dentists to stand silent about the fact that so-called silver fillings are mainly mercury, an acute neuro-toxin. Other states have repealed it; some were instructed to do so by the state Attorney General. As a former Attorney General myself, I believe Attorney General Gansler would find the regulation in violation of the First Amendment, free speech rights of mercury-free dentists, but the Board refuses to ask. The board, knowing it cannot enforce the regulation, keeps it on its books to intimidate dentists, while not enforcing it.
- Hiding the mercury smacks of racism and cultural elitism. The NAACP resolution, attached, confirms that mercury/silver fillings are disproportionately being administered to lower-income and minority Americans. To quote from an NAACP witness testifying before Congress in 2003: “The rich get a choice; the poor get mercury.” So as white adult middle-class Marylanders escape to non-toxic alternatives, those left behind are getting mercury filling without knowing it – thanks to the unconstitutional policies of the Maryland dental board.
- I can personally attest that the dental board’s enforcement policies are racist. The board tries to stop dentists from informing Marylanders that the amalgam is mainly mercury. A white male dentist advertised the fact that he offers “mercury-free” dental fillings, and the board challenged him to stop. His lawyer said the dentist had a First Amendment right to so advertise, and the board immediately dismissed the charges. Then an African-American female dentist advertised “mercury-free” dental fillings, and the board challenged her. As her lawyer, I raised the earlier case as precedent and asked for a dismissal. The board refused. I then raised the fact that the board was treating African-American females by a harsher standard than white males, and the Board again refused to dismiss charges. (I raise this case with some fear – that the Board will try to get even with this dentist, and it is therefore essential I put this fear on the public record.)
The dental board will remain this way as long as its members are selected by themselves. Astonishingly, the dental association is allowed to strong-arm the Governor, any Governor, in the selection process – he or she is required to pick members only from the list submitted by the dental association. That means dentistry is a cartel. No reform is possible until the Governor, not the association, has the unfettered right to pick members. Nor is reform possible as long as dentists are a majority of the board.
Charles G. Brown
National Counsel
February 21, 2007