Dental Tribune United Kingdom Edition

March 25-31, 20138 Comment United Kingdom Edition O n 31st October 2012 ‘The Cosmetic Prod- ucts (Safety) (Amend- ment) Regulations 2012 (im- plementing Directive 2011/84 EU which amends Directive 76/768/EEC)’ came into force for the first time, clearing up the legal position on tooth whitening in the UK. Prior to this time the ma- jority of the profession car- ried out tooth whitening pro- cedures in breach of the law; in the absence of any political will to enforce it a messy situa- tion ensued. The problem was that despite its illegality, tooth whitening was a treatment which in many cases offered a cheaper, less damaging and less risky approach to improv- ing patients’ smiles compared with conventionally carrying out veneers or crowns. However the current amendment completely changes this. The vast majority of tooth whitening procedures can now comfortably be car- ried out with concentrations of six per cent or less Hydrogen Peroxide, rendering the need to use greater concentrations almost obsolete. According- ly, it is now incredibly diffi- cult for dentists to provide a clinical justification to break the law. The regulations set out that products containing or releas- ing up to six per cent hydrogen peroxide can be used, subject to the following conditions: • It is only to be sold to dental practitioners • For each cycle of use, the first use is to be by a dental practitioner, or under their di- rect supervision, if an equiva- lent level of safety can be en- sured • After the first cycle of use, the product may be provided by the dental practitioner to the consumer to complete the cycle or use • It is not to be used on a per- son under 18 years of age The GDC position state- ment on tooth whitening fur- ther expands on this legisla- tion stating that if they receive information or a complaint that a registrant is using a product for cosmetic purposes in excess of six per cent they may face fitness to practise proceedings and can expect to have the matter referred to the relevant trading standards department. The Dental Defence Union (DDU) advises its members that in the worst case scenario ‘dental professionals who use bleaching products contain- ing or releasing over six per cent hydrogen peroxide could be imprisoned and/or fined up to £5,000 under the Consumer Protection Act 1987.’ The DDU Tooth whitening update, better late than never Neel Kothari looks at the situation around whitening ‘Despite its illegal- ity, tooth whitening was a treatment which in many cas- es offered a cheaper, less damaging and less risky approach to improving pa- tients’ smiles’