FDA's abysmal 2009 amalgam rule -- allowing a cover-up of the very existence of the mercury, and not even protecting children and unborn children from this unnecessary mercury exposure -- triggered a massive response from grassroots America.
"Unprecedented consumer-level pressure," according to the respected independent publication FDA Webview, meant that "no final rule in FDA's modern history, or perhaps ever, has attracted this kind of organized opposition." With a myriad of consumers repeatedly phoning and e-mailing FDA, the agency had to seriously consider a series of excellent petitions for reconsideration, one filed by Washington lawyer Jim Turner for Citizens for Health, another by IAOMT lawyers Jim Love and Bob Reeves, and a third by University of Virginia medical school professor emeritus Richard Edlich.
Then in June, 2010 the heat went from national to international. The United Nations convened the nations to negotiate a treaty on mercury, where the cause of mercury-free dentistry was well-represented. Charlie Brown of Consumers for Dental Choice founded the World Alliance for Mercury-Free Dentistry and brought a delegation from seven nations to the conference.
As the chief protector of dental mercury, FDA was exposed for the pariah that it has become on protecting consumer health and safety.
On the fifth day of the United Nations conference, FDA caved. FDA announced it will convene hearings this December before its Dental Products Panel to determine whether to stop amalgam use for children and pregnant women.