DENTAL MATERIALS AND ESTROGENICITY

LETTERS are mentally preoccupied or depressed. Julian M. Firestone, D.D.S. New York DENTAL MATERIALS AND

ESTROQENICITY

After dealing with the amalgam and potential for cross-infection controversies, the profession is again assailed with allegations that we are routinely using deleterious materials in our practices. Namely, an article appeared in the March 1996 issue of Environmental Health Prospectives entitled "Estrogenicity of resin based composites and sealants in dentistry" that raises some familiar concerns that critics of the profession have espoused. The thesis elaborated in this article states that the bisphenol-A and

bisphenol-A dimethacrylaic components of sealant and resins are estrogenic and probably contribute to xenoestrogen exposure in humans. Historically, many of the materials that have been common in the dental armamentarium have assumed their role through historical acceptance. Bis-GMA has been tested for safety and efficacy at the ADA as a dental material. It has never been assessed for its es-

trogenicity. The potential deleterious effects of bisphenol-A and its degradation products are welldocumented. However, considering past hysteria about dental amalgam and the potential for the spread of cross-contamination-type infections, the need should be for scientific evidence that will determine whether risk is present and, if so, the gravity of that risk. The potential danger posed 1292 JADA, Vol. 127, September 1996

by bisphenol-A-containing dental products should be assessed though scientific research. Hopefully, hysterical outcries from the press will not outweigh the need for quality investigation in this area. Programs that encompass research at the laboratory bench level should be undertaken, carried through animal models and finally, in-situ assessment in humans should be elaborated. As dental researchers, practicing wet-gloved dentists and as academics, we feel that before conclusions are made condemning composite resins and resin sealants, scientific evi-

I

issue will be addressed in a more intellectual and scientific manner than the emotion and hysteria that have been the center of some issues in dentistry in the recent past. Charles M. Habib, Ph.D., D.M.D. Assistant Professor of Restorative Dentistry Gerard Kugel, D.M.D. Associate Clinical Professor Head, Division of Operative Dentistry Director of Gavel Center for Dental Research Department of Restorative Dentistry Tufts University School of Dental Medicine Boston

The potenal danger

TOBACCO PRODUCTS

posed by bisphenolA-containing dental products should be assessed though scientific research.

Organized dentistry has always been an outspoken crusader against the use of tobacco products and has done much to educate the general public about the risks associated with tobacco use. Several years ago, substitute sources of nicotine became available as prescription drugs to aid doctors with "kick the habit" programs for patients addicted to tobacco products. Physician groups at the time questioned the training and expertise of dentists to prescribe nicotine supplements. It was correctly recognized that tobacco cessation required appropriate counseling to be successful for most patients. Recently, the surgeon general of the United States declared that nicotine was as addictive as cocaine, and tobacco companies were subsequently accused of "spiking" their products with added nicotine to enhance consumer addiction. Last month, the FDA approved over-the-

Hopofully, hystercal outcnes from the press will not outweigh the need for quality investigation in this area. dence should be gathered to deny or substantiate these concerns. As dental professionals who have seen dentistry criticized for the use of mercury in restoratives and the lack of appropriate disinfection procedures for our instruments and equipment, we feel that this issue should be resolved through competent scientific investigation. Hopefully, this