Let me begin by expressing my gratitude to Maine Senate President Michael Michaud, Sen. John Martin, Reps. Steve Stanley and Roger Sherman for their courage and leadership in sponsoring LD 1409, understanding the importance of addressing the health effects of mercury fillings.

In this day and age it is still hard to fathom the injustice and negligence of the population and environment because of the fact that most people in our state and nation are still being exposed to mercury unknowingly through their mercury dental fillings. The position that most dentists still using mercury fillings will take is that the same elemental mercury that we are banning in fever thermometers and fluorescent light bulbs is somehow safe when placed in the mouth.

The Legislature’s Natural Resources Committee has worked hard to protect Maine’s natural resources, but I ask them to contemplate the value of human beings as a natural resource. If we are to consider the elemental mercury in fever thermometers to be poisonous enough to ban them, is it not the same elemental mercury that makes up 50 percent of the mercury filling?

In amending the law to address the health effects of mercury fillings it is important to understand that most vulnerable are our children and pregnant women. The brain of a child is undergoing rapid growth and development and since dentistry admits that mercury vapor leaks from mercury fillings, all children, and pregnant women in the state should be protected from this toxic exposure.

The health of the environment is affected greatly by the continuous leakage of mercury into wastewater treatment facilities through dental offices, and by the mercury content of the feces and urine of individuals with these so-called silver fillings. There is also concern over the cremation of bodies with mercury fillings and their impact on health and the environment.

With evidence mounting and new studies connecting mercury fillings to various health problems it is time to implement the “precautionary principle” when it comes to this issue. The precautionary principle has been defined as “when an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.”

This principle includes taking action in the face of uncertainty, shifting burdens of proof to those who create risks, analysis of alternatives to potentially harmful activities and participatory decision-making methods.

I am serving on the committee that is working with dentists to design a pollution prevention plan and to implement source reduction for use of mercury in dentistry. The main focus of the group is to prepare a report due July 15, 2002.

I urge the members of the Natural Resources Committee to help our cause for source reduction by amending the law and address the health effects of the most toxic poison known to human health and the environment. By listing mercury dental fillings as mercury-added product, by fully educating the public of the content of the mercury in the filling and by phasing out the use of this material due to the potential health and environmental concerns, they will be greatly aiding our cause.

I am asking the committee not to lose precious time by waiting for the report, but to consider an immediate ban of the use of mercury fillings in pregnant women and children.

With its amending of the laws to address the health effects of mercury fillings, the committee will aid in erasing a dark legacy for this controversial, unsightly and highly toxic material used for filling teeth.

Dentistry’s acceptance of the fact that it is time and that it is willing to address this issue is our best chance to protect the health of humans and our environment, and to promote a bright and healthy future.

Pamela J. Anderson lives in Houlton.