FAN Bulletin #519:
March 11, 2006.
Dear All,
I recently circulated the American Dental Association’s (ADA) statement from a Superior Court in California, in which this organization claimed no liability or responsibility for mercury amalgams and thereby attempted to ditch their members from any legal help when confronted with lawsuits on this practice (see FAN bulletins # 512 and 516). I am anxious to hear from more readers on the responses to this quote that they have had from their own dentist, or other dentists. How do they feel about being ditched in this way? Is this what they expected?
Earlier, I had distributed another shocking quote from the ADA on what it considers to be the “professional” behavior required of their members on the fluoridation issue. I think it is useful to put these two quotes side by side. In my view, one quote suckers the dentists into endorsing and promoting something - without exercising any due diligence in the matter - and the other says, by the way, if you did what we recommended on another practice, we are sorry but “you are on your own if you get sued for following our advice.”
I hope you find these two quotes helpful in your dealings with the ADA and the dentists they continue to dupe.
You might also run both of these quotes past your local doctor as well. Too many doctors rely on what the AMA tells them, and in this case the AMA relies on the ADA on dental matters, even though in this case it involves health concerns which go far beyond teeth. Indeed, on health and toxicological issues, neither the ADA, nor its members, has any significant training. So there is a whole lot of duping going on. The ADA dupes its membership, as well as duping the AMA and then the AMA dupes its membership! Then the Dental and Medical schools dupe their students. Of course, the nice thing for students and very busy professionals about being duped, is you don’t have to read or study anything! Which is fine until someone holds you accountable for the advice you give to the public. Thus, the so-called “sophisticated” medical and dental communities in Burlington, Vermont, may live to regret the moronic ads that they signed in Burlington, Vermont. “Got teeth, keep fluoride!” Hardly, due diligence.
QUOTE 1: The “professional” advice the ADA gave to dentists on fluoridation in a White Paper they issued in 1979:
“Individual dentists must be convinced that they need not be familiar with scientific reports of laboratory and field investigations on fluoridation to be effective participants in the promotion program and that nonparticipation is overt neglect of professional responsibility.”
QUOTE 2: The ADA’s attempt to avoid liabilities for mercury amalgams and other “allegedly dangerous products used by dentists.”
“The ADA owes no legal duty of care to protect the public from allegedly dangerous products used by dentists. The ADA did not manufacture, design, supply or install the mercury containing amalgams. The ADA does not control those who do. The ADA’s only alleged involvement was to provide information regarding its use.”
Tolhurst v. J & J and ADA, Superior Court, Santa Clara, CA. Case No. 718228, 1995.
There is a third quote, not from the ADA, but from me:
“Fluoridation is for the birds: they promote it like parrots and defend it like chickens!”
Hopefully, the chickens will come home to roost when the lawsuits for liability begin.
Paul Connett
>