One Person's Story
DivaLove
Shortly before High School graduation in 1970, at the insistance and expense
of my mother, who stated "you should start out your new life with good
teeth", I had extensive dental work done involving the amalgam restoration
of almost 40% of my teeth. My teeth (which were strong and had given me NO
pain up until this work was done) were deeply drilled and undercut and
packed tightly with mercury/amalgam fillings, mostly in the posterior teeth,
but including my upper left eye tooth, which was very deeply drilled and
filled.
I began to notice some odd sensations, shortly after the work was completed,
dizzyness and tunnelvision and numbness of my extremities were the most
notable. 5 months later I joined the US Navy as a Wave, and left Hawaii for
basic training in Maryland. My goal was to eventually fly military aircraft
with a long term goal of applying for the astronaut training program,
therefore I requested and was accepted to the aviation branch of the US
Navy, whose training facilities were in Millington (Memphis) Tennessee.
While undergoing my basic flight readyness training, I experienced a Grand
Mal Epileptic seizure. I had no idea what had happened to me, but awoke in
the dispensary with a corpsman asking me what my name and Navy serial number
were. Of course, I was completely confused and disoriented and had no idea
who I was, or how I had got there. Having fallen at the side of a swimming
pool on a concrete slab, I had a large knot on the back of my head and
abrasions on my ankles and elbows from the seizure's gyrations.
After my school was completed, I was stationed at Alameda Naval Air Station,
near San Francisco, and the Navy scheduled various diagnostic tests for me
at their Oak Knoll Naval Hospital. I had EEG's and Brain Scans. The EEG's
showed the typical epileptic
series of spikes and domes, when aggravated by flashing light. The "Brain
Scan" showed no visible, organic cause for the condition. I have never had
an MRI, since the technology did not exist at that time. I was prescribed
anti-seizure medications, Dilantin and Phenobarbitol along with Valium to
control the seizures, which continued with a frequency of 3-4 Grand Mal
seizures per year. Since I had no "aura" or any indication of when and
where a seizure would strike me, I was informed by the Navy that not only
would I never be able to fly aircraft, but that for me to be even in the
VICINITY of aircraft would be dangerous and create undue liability for the
Navy. I was therefore offered an Honorable Discharge for Medical Reasons,
which I agreed to take.
I went back home to my parents' house, and fell into a deep depression. My
seizures continued to occur, without warning (and usually resulting in an
ambulance ride, or at the very least, a huge goose-egg on the back of my
skull from striking concrete floors or sidewalks, head-first). I also
experienced "petit mal" seizures and "deja-vu", but did
not always recognize their occurrence at the time. I never, ever experienced
any "aura" or signals of impending seizure. I have had them while asleep,
while awake, while driving in my car, (with disastrous results which,
luckily I survived.) I have come to consciousness in strange surroundings,
in the shower, in a parkinglot, and usually with someone asking me, "what is
your name?" and me thinking.."sheeze, damned if I know!" or worst of all, is
coming to all alone, and trying to figure out first, who am I? and second,
what am I doing? and third, where do I live?
I continued on a maintenance dose of Dilantin for over 10 years, resigned to
my situation and trying to make the best of what my life had become. All
the time I was battling depression, anxiety and suicidal thoughts, and on
more than one occasion actually did attempt to take my own life, without
success.
Then, in 1984, something very interesting happened.
I lost that deep mercury/amalgam filling in my left upper "eye" tooth, (the
tooth actually cracked and broke in half just below the gumline) and the
tooth was subsequently replaced by an implanted false, plastic tooth.
I NEVER HAD ANOTHER EPILEPTIC SEIZURE AFTER THAT DAY.
I began to realize that there was a specific correllation between the time
(at age 18) when I had the aforementioned extensive dental work done, and
the onset of my
seizure disorder within a few months of the work being completed.
After 3 more years without seizures, I weaned myself carefully from the 400
mg of
Dilantin I had taken daily for over since the age of 19 years. To this day,
I remain seizure free, although I do experience other physical neurological
symptoms which, I
have come to believe, are related to the other amalgam fillings still in my
teeth. I intend to have them all removed at the earliest possible time.
However, it is difficult, since my medical coverage has been through the
government
medical insurance in the state where I live, and since amalgam fillings are
the "cheapest" available and are "approved" by the ADA, they are the only
type which is paid for by my insurance. To have them replaced with
composite fillings (which are considered to be solely "cosmetic" in nature)
means I would have to pay the total cost "out of pocket" and I am unable to
afford that on my own. Until the ADA (American Dental Association) is
successfully sued enough times to make them wake up to the fact that they
are poisoning America with mercury fillings, and take responsibilty for
ending it, this situation will remain unchanged.
I can't help thinking that if I had never had those amalgam fillings, my
life would have been much different. I might have actually become the
astronaut I wanted to be, instead of an unemployed, welfare mother with
emotional problems. I was intelligent, educated and had the ambition and
drive to become a contributing member of society, but intead I ended up for
a very long time, being a drain on public resources. In the last ten years
I have working hard to improve myself, and am off public assistance, but by
being off public assistance I also cannot afford medical insurance for
myself or my 10 year old son. This might actually be a GOOD thing...since
HE at least has been spared the amalgam fillings that he would have received
from "state" dental programs, and perhaps he will go through life without
the effects of Mercury poisoning that I have had to endure.
If (as I read in a post on this newsgroup) you believe that Mercury
Poisoning from Amalgam Fillings is not a real danger to our society, (I
paraphrase - "if it were, we would all be crazy") Then take a look at the
National News...and the state of our "Mad" Society. with its violence and
mayhem. I wonder how many of those "crazies" have amalgam fillings?
For those of you who have no visible, physical or "organic" cause for your
physical, neurological or other unexplained health problems, I would suggest
that you seriously consider having all of your amalgam fillings removed as
soon as possible. At the very least, it should help prevent further
poisoning and deterioration of your organs (brain
especially) and at the most, you may find it to be the root cause of your
health problems and that removing them will make you feel a lot better, and
help you live a lot longer.
--
*************************************
http://www.puamana.net
Puamana Enterprises
Internet/Computer Services
Dr. Hal Dawl
news:3819fba6@coconut-wireless...
> For those of you who have no visible, physical or "organic" cause for your
> physical, neurological or other unexplained health problems, I would
suggest
> that you seriously consider having all of your amalgam fillings removed as
> soon as possible. At the very least, it should help prevent further
> poisoning and deterioration of your organs (brain
> especially) and at the most
And all those who have a visibile, organic cause should leave them in?
DivaLove
fillings.
I think it is criminal that being "poor" means being toothless or being
poisoned.
Dr. Hal Dawl <wil...@cciiu.net> wrote in message
news:bdnS3.3910$49.2...@news.flash.net...
DivaLove <pua...@flex.com> wrote in message
news:3819fba6@coconut-wireless...
> For those of you who have no visible, physical or "organic" cause for your
> physical, neurological or other unexplained health problems, I would
suggest
> that you seriously consider having all of your amalgam fillings removed as
> soon as possible. At the very least, it should help prevent further
> poisoning and deterioration of your organs (brain
Renate Ratlos
wrote:
>Sheeze!! Of Course NOT! I advocate the removal of ALL Mercury/Amalgam
>fillings.
>I think it is criminal that being "poor" means being toothless or being
>poisoned.
It is criminal. And now please count how many politicians and managers
of health insurances companies do know this very well, AND STILL keep
on thumbing patients down?
--
The most famous email addresses:
B...@government.go.uk the.one-le...@transrapid.de
know.th...@nasa.org the.two-ar...@bundesregierung.de
make.your.own...@home.jp make....@dentist.rulez.borg
DivaLove
(from http://www.lava.net/~hda/leg4.html
FREEDOM OF CHOICE
The "Freedom of Choice" bill, SB 2594, was "held" in committee, in other
words, killed for lack of support from the Senate Consumer Protection
Committee, chaired by Senators Wayne Metcalf and David Ige. The House
version of the "Freedom of Choice" bill, HB 3105, was also "killed" in the
House Health Committee chaired by Representative Alex Santiago.
What can we do?
Renate Ratlos <renate...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:381b1c57...@news1.ewetel.de...
Joel M. Eichen
>Sheeze!! Of Course NOT! I advocate the removal of ALL Mercury/Amalgam
>fillings.
>I think it is criminal that being "poor" means being toothless or being
>poisoned.
I would suggest replacing each one with porcelain inlays. This is most
inert type of restoration. You might have sell your SUV to pay for
this, but it will be well worth it (to you). and to us.
Cheers,
Joel
-------
>Dr. Hal Dawl <wil...@cciiu.net> wrote in message
>news:bdnS3.3910$49.2...@news.flash.net...
>DivaLove <pua...@flex.com> wrote in message
>news:3819fba6@coconut-wireless...
>> For those of you who have no visible, physical or "organic" cause for your
>> physical, neurological or other unexplained health problems, I would
>suggest
>> that you seriously consider having all of your amalgam fillings removed as
>> soon as possible. At the very least, it should help prevent further
>> poisoning and deterioration of your organs (brain
Joel M. Eichen
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>It is criminal. And now please count how many politicians and managers
>of health insurances companies do know this very well, AND STILL keep
>on thumbing patients down?
This is incorrect. No insurance company turns thumbs down. If a
filling looks the slightest bit corroded or uneven, the dentist
replaces it with no questions asked.
Cheers,
Joel
------
Joel M. Eichen, D.D.S.
====
"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>In my own state (Hawaii) alone:
>(from http://www.lava.net/~hda/leg4.html
>FREEDOM OF CHOICE
>The "Freedom of Choice" bill, SB 2594, was "held" in committee, in other
>words, killed for lack of support from the Senate Consumer Protection
>Committee, chaired by Senators Wayne Metcalf and David Ige. The House
>version of the "Freedom of Choice" bill, HB 3105, was also "killed" in the
>House Health Committee chaired by Representative Alex Santiago.
>What can we do?
>Renate Ratlos <renate...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>news:381b1c57...@news1.ewetel.de...
>On Fri, 29 Oct 1999 10:27:03 -1000, "DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com>
>wrote:
>>Sheeze!! Of Course NOT! I advocate the removal of ALL Mercury/Amalgam
>>fillings.
>>I think it is criminal that being "poor" means being toothless or being
>>poisoned.
>It is criminal. And now please count how many politicians and managers
Joel M. Eichen
>I NEVER HAD ANOTHER EPILEPTIC SEIZURE AFTER THAT DAY.
An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
ANY disease and amalgam!
Cheers,
Joel
--------------
DivaLove
Did you read my original posting? Last time I looked, I did not own an SUV,
(just a limping 1985 Mercury Marquis station wagon.) although dentists, as a
rule own SUV's, Mercedes Benz's and even, on occasion, Jaguar XKE's (truth!
I had a dentist once who parked his yellow one right in front of the
office....intimidating?) Too bad they have financed them on the misery of
their patients. Dentistry is the only health profession where you can be
"ok" with stating - "I did it for the MONEY".
The damage has been done, and cannot be undone, but a moratorium on mercury
use in dentistry across the board would be a start toward stopping the
patient abuse practiced by the majority of modern dentists, abuse which is
not only sanctioned but often REQUIRED by the ADA.
I don't want the moon. I just want to be NOT poisoned by my dentist,
without having to sell my okole (hawaiian for ass) to pay for it.
Is composite really THAT much more expensive than MERCURY?
Or is it that most dentists today just simply DON'T KNOW HOW to use it, and
are too lazy (or too afraid of losing a few weeks revenues) to get the
training they need?
There has to be a point at which the harm done outweighs the cost to correct
it. Who can better bear that cost? The average patient, or the Dentist
with his Jaguar?
Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:7vd57d$bt$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>Sheeze!! Of Course NOT! I advocate the removal of ALL Mercury/Amalgam
>fillings.
>I think it is criminal that being "poor" means being toothless or being
>poisoned.
I would suggest replacing each one with porcelain inlays. This is most
inert type of restoration. You might have sell your SUV to pay for
this, but it will be well worth it (to you). and to us.
Cheers,
Joel
-------
>Dr. Hal Dawl <wil...@cciiu.net> wrote in message
>news:bdnS3.3910$49.2...@news.flash.net...
>DivaLove <pua...@flex.com> wrote in message
>news:3819fba6@coconut-wireless...
>> For those of you who have no visible, physical or "organic" cause for
your
>> physical, neurological or other unexplained health problems, I would
>suggest
>> that you seriously consider having all of your amalgam fillings removed
as
>> soon as possible. At the very least, it should help prevent further
>> poisoning and deterioration of your organs (brain
Joel M. Eichen
>Dear Joel,
>Did you read my original posting?
I sure did.
>Last time I looked, I did not own an SUV,
>(just a limping 1985 Mercury Marquis station wagon.) although dentists, as a
>rule own SUV's, Mercedes Benz's and even, on occasion, Jaguar XKE's (truth!
No crime in that, is there?
>I had a dentist once who parked his yellow one right in front of the
>office....intimidating?)
No crime in that, is there?
>Too bad they have financed them on the misery of
>their patients.
Gee, I thought that dentists helped patients. All of the ones around
here do.
> Dentistry is the only health profession where you can be
>"ok" with stating - "I did it for the MONEY".
I suppose that whatever you do, you do for the love of it. I suppose
that if your boss told you that as of tomorrow that your salary would
be zero, you'd tell him,
"That's fine. I will be in anyway. I do not mind getting food out of
garbage cans."
>The damage has been done, and cannot be undone,
Sorry, no damage.
>but a moratorium on mercury
>use in dentistry across the board would be a start toward stopping the
>patient abuse practiced by the majority of modern dentists, abuse which is
>not only sanctioned but often REQUIRED by the ADA.
There ya go. Picking on those rich, SUV driving, money making
dentists!
Cheers,
Joel
---
>I don't want the moon. I just want to be NOT poisoned by my dentist,
>without having to sell my okole (hawaiian for ass) to pay for it.
You were not poisoned. Even Renate will tell you that.
>
>Is composite really THAT much more expensive than MERCURY?
Actually, mercury is more expensive. That's why we dilute it with
silver.
>Or is it that most dentists today just simply DON'T KNOW HOW to use it,
Never met one who did not use white composite on front teeth!
Everybody knows how.
>and
>are too lazy (or too afraid of losing a few weeks revenues) to get the
>training they need?
Training? Do you think that someone saying "Bottle A" plus then
"Bottle B" takes several weeks? I have cheat cards for every
procedure. A high school kid could do it (if he knew how to drill
beforehand).
>There has to be a point at which the harm done outweighs the cost to correct
>it. Who can better bear that cost? The average patient, or the Dentist
>with his Jaguar?
I love it! C'Mon. I'll give you a ride.
Cheers,
Joel
----
But you have to kick in gas money.
>Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:7vd57d$bt$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>>Sheeze!! Of Course NOT! I advocate the removal of ALL Mercury/Amalgam
>>fillings.
>>I think it is criminal that being "poor" means being toothless or being
>>poisoned.
>I would suggest replacing each one with porcelain inlays. This is most
>inert type of restoration. You might have sell your SUV to pay for
>this, but it will be well worth it (to you). and to us.
>Cheers,
>Joel
>-------
>>Dr. Hal Dawl <wil...@cciiu.net> wrote in message
>>news:bdnS3.3910$49.2...@news.flash.net...
>>DivaLove <pua...@flex.com> wrote in message
>>news:3819fba6@coconut-wireless...
>>> For those of you who have no visible, physical or "organic" cause for
>your
>>> physical, neurological or other unexplained health problems, I would
>>suggest
>>> that you seriously consider having all of your amalgam fillings removed
>as
>>> soon as possible. At the very least, it should help prevent further
>>> poisoning and deterioration of your organs (brain
DivaLove
2-3 hours of doing simple internet searches on Mercury, Amalgam, Dentistry:
http://www.amalgam.org/
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/amalgamclassaction
http://web-maker.com/dihi/index.html
http://web-maker.com/dihi/index.html
http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Station/6000/
http://www.consultclarity.com/blazing/
http://www.midnightcafe.com/alzh/
http://neuro-www.mgh.harvard.edu/forum/
http://www.it-city.com/research/
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pcsol/
http://www.santel.lu/SANTEL/dentistry/dentistry.html
You might consider looking into joining this organization if you really care
about the issue:
http://www.iaomt.org/
Please see also - my posting "just a case report on amalgam" transplanted
from alt.health.dental-amalgam newsgroup.
Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:7vd53r$5q5$1...@fir.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>I NEVER HAD ANOTHER EPILEPTIC SEIZURE AFTER THAT DAY.
An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
Joel M. Eichen
>Here's some research for you to do Joel, and this compilation took me only
>2-3 hours of doing simple internet searches on Mercury, Amalgam, Dentistry:
>http://www.amalgam.org/
>http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/amalgamclassaction
>http://web-maker.com/dihi/index.html
>http://web-maker.com/dihi/index.html
>http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Station/6000/
>http://www.consultclarity.com/blazing/
>http://www.midnightcafe.com/alzh/
>http://neuro-www.mgh.harvard.edu/forum/
>http://www.it-city.com/research/
>http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pcsol/
>http://www.santel.lu/SANTEL/dentistry/dentistry.html
I will look but most are bogus reports by ignorant people. I do not
mean this as disparagement. They just are ill-informed.
Cheers,
Joel
----
>You might consider looking into joining this organization if you really care
>about the issue:
>http://www.iaomt.org/
>Please see also - my posting "just a case report on amalgam" transplanted
>from alt.health.dental-amalgam newsgroup.
>Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:7vd53r$5q5$1...@fir.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>>I NEVER HAD ANOTHER EPILEPTIC SEIZURE AFTER THAT DAY.
>An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
DivaLove
of us make more with what we do than others. I happen to be in the lower
middle class myself...
But I wonder how many of your family have amalgam in their mouths?
Dentists use to use asbestos packing on gums and in rootcanals too, I
understand...does that mean it's safe? Obviously not, as indicated by
several class action lawsuits that are still being paid out.
There are lawsuits in the works that will answer all these questions for
both dentists and their patients. But hey, there is a freight train bearing
down on you. Are you going to wait for it to run you over before you take a
stand? Or are you going to do the right thing for the right reasons?
If you had ever suffered from mercury related diseases yourself, or had
members of your family suffer, we would not be having this discussion at
all.
Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:7vd7v7$219$1...@ash.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
I sure did.
Sorry, no damage.
Cheers,
Joel
---
>
Cheers,
Joel
----
>Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:7vd57d$bt$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>>Sheeze!! Of Course NOT! I advocate the removal of ALL Mercury/Amalgam
>>fillings.
>>I think it is criminal that being "poor" means being toothless or being
>>poisoned.
>I would suggest replacing each one with porcelain inlays. This is most
>inert type of restoration. You might have sell your SUV to pay for
>this, but it will be well worth it (to you). and to us.
>Cheers,
>Joel
>-------
>>Dr. Hal Dawl <wil...@cciiu.net> wrote in message
>>news:bdnS3.3910$49.2...@news.flash.net...
>>DivaLove <pua...@flex.com> wrote in message
>>news:3819fba6@coconut-wireless...
>>> For those of you who have no visible, physical or "organic" cause for
>your
>>> physical, neurological or other unexplained health problems, I would
>>suggest
>>> that you seriously consider having all of your amalgam fillings removed
>as
>>> soon as possible. At the very least, it should help prevent further
>>> poisoning and deterioration of your organs (brain
DivaLove
:)
Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:7vd886$63h$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
Cheers,
Joel
----
>Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:7vd53r$5q5$1...@fir.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>>I NEVER HAD ANOTHER EPILEPTIC SEIZURE AFTER THAT DAY.
>An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
Joel M. Eichen
>Here's some research for you to do Joel, and this compilation took me only
>2-3 hours of doing simple internet searches on Mercury, Amalgam, Dentistry:
>http://www.amalgam.org/
>http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/amalgamclassaction
>http://web-maker.com/dihi/index.html
>http://web-maker.com/dihi/index.html
Here's one:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*** DENTAL CROWNS ***
A crown is an artificial top for a tooth.
OKAY!
Crowns are usually made of
dental porcelain. This material is somewhat like ordinary porcelain --
but
there are some slight differences:
Ordinary porcelain doesn't "gleam", or fluoresce, in natural light the
way
that natural teeth do. To "fluoresce" simply means to glow under UV
light
(and there's lots of UV light in sunlight).
THIS IS GETTING DEEP!
Lots of materials fluoresce:
Some natural ores fluoresce. Dental porcelain fluoresces. Even uranium
fluoresces.
The last two materials may look funny together, but it's no laughing
matter. Dental porcelain fluoresces BECAUSE of its uranium content. In
fact, the uranium has been deliberately added to dental porcelain in
order
to make it gleam in natural light (and hence, look more realistic).
The
patent to add uranium to dental porcelain was granted in 1942 [74].
The actual amount of uranium may seem small by weight -- 80 to 1000
ppm,
according to one survey of forty-eight brand names [75]. But this
uranium
decays in several steps -- and emits an alpha-particle at almost every
step.
URANIUM IN CROWNS! No wonder they look so good!
It is believed that most alpha rays are stopped by the skin; however,
there
is obviously very little skin lining the mouth, and it is well-known
that
alpha particles are particularly dangerous because once they are
inside the
body, they leave a very dense trail of molecular debris as they pass
through
[76]. In the 1970s, a number of studies warned that these levels of
radia-
tion from the uranium in dental porcelain are not trivial [77, 78,
79]. In
fact, according to one unverifiable estimate, the uranium in dental
porcelain
is responsible for about 2000 cancer deaths every year [80].
The good news is that the use of uranium in dental porcelain is
supposed
to have been banned in the mid-1980s [81]. However, no type of recall
has
ever been issued -- and there isn't any information on how strictly
this ban
is being enforced, either. Your best bet is to avoid this material if
at
all possible, and to err on the side of safety. YOUR safety.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Okay, forget bridges and crowns. Anything more?
>http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Station/6000/
>http://www.consultclarity.com/blazing/
>http://www.midnightcafe.com/alzh/
>http://neuro-www.mgh.harvard.edu/forum/
>http://www.it-city.com/research/
>http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pcsol/
>http://www.santel.lu/SANTEL/dentistry/dentistry.html
>You might consider looking into joining this organization if you really care
>about the issue:
>http://www.iaomt.org/
>Please see also - my posting "just a case report on amalgam" transplanted
>from alt.health.dental-amalgam newsgroup.
>Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:7vd53r$5q5$1...@fir.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>>I NEVER HAD ANOTHER EPILEPTIC SEIZURE AFTER THAT DAY.
>An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
Shirley Gutkowski RDH
know a single dentist that has ever done poor dentistry on purpose, and I have
worked for some poor dentists! Not a single one would put anything in the
mouth of their patient's that he wouldn't put in the mouth of his own family
member (even the ones that he likes).
DivaLove, you should be hollering from the tree tops to little kids and
teenagers to brush and floss their little heads off so that they don't have to
be in a position where amalgam has to be used. You should be going to schools
and talking about cleaning teeth and gums, teaching others how to avoid the
"toxic" substances that dentistry uses to fill cavities. Argueing with the
fine dentists on this list is the wrong place for you to use this kind of
energy. It is not just you, all of the anti amalgamists that "know" that
mercury leaks out of silver fillings should take this advice.
Do some research on what the research says about topical fluoride, and xylitol,
and plaque control. And share THAT story.
Shirley Gutkowski, RDH
The harder you work, the luckier you are.
Dr. Hal Dawl
> Sheeze!! Of Course NOT! I advocate the removal of ALL Mercury/Amalgam
> fillings.
I have a story. I took over my practice from a dentist who is now in his
80s. He placed a lot of amalgam restorations in his time and did thousands
the old fashioned way: squeezing the excess mercury out by hand. He is in
very good health.
I retained a good number of his patients and still have a number (or their
progeny). Many of them are in their 80s and 90s and are relatively healthy.
Some have of the usual diseases of old age.
Well, a long time ago, many of these people had uncomfortable teeth. My
predecessor took care of the real bad ones by removing them and replacing
them with artificial teeth. However, most of the teeth with cavities were
successfully treated with amalgam restorations and many are still extant and
serviceable. Because of his skill and good service, these people (and there
are plenty of them) have enjoy a lifetime of using their own teeth without
discomfort and with minimal esthetic harm (usually only a problem when they
yawn, which they do a lot of nowadays, given their age).
I still place amalgam restorations because they are good, safe, and cheap.
I do a lot of the fancier tooth-colored fillings, but that's only because
the materials that are becoming available are getting much better. However,
there is still a problem. They are over used and many dentists can't do
them right. They are difficult to do and if you don't do them with strict
isolation and painstaking attention to technique, they don't last very long
at all. So I get new patients all the time who I happily do root canals and
crowns (big stuff) because the tooth-colored materials are so-so for general
use by general dentists. Some dentists do a fine job putting them in, but,
in my not so humble opinion, a lot of them don't. I think this will change.
I think the public will benefit from newer, more durable materials and
dentists who do a better job putting them in (or maybe putting them in will
get a whole lot easier). Then we will have other toxins to worry about, but
that's another story.
I still think the best restoration is no restoration: preventing tooth
decay and gum disease should be the focus of dentists, hygienists, and
patients. However, will still be tooth decay for some time and most of
those teeth will be restored to health by amalgam restorations for some
time.
For every anecdote about ill-effects from amalgams, there are millions and
millions of people with no ill-effects who have enjoyed years of good
service and comfortable teeth. Those comfortable choppers will help them
live longer because they will be able to eat better. They will live into
their 80s, 90s, and 100s and will be grateful that their dentists did a good
job without harming them.
Something to think about, no?
Joel M. Eichen
>An open mind is all I ask.
>:)
>Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:7vd886$63h$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>>Here's some research for you to do Joel, and this compilation took me only
>>2-3 hours of doing simple internet searches on Mercury, Amalgam, Dentistry:
>>http://www.amalgam.org/
>>http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/amalgamclassaction
>>http://web-maker.com/dihi/index.html
>>http://web-maker.com/dihi/index.html
This site particular encourages mass hysteria. Its complete with a
message board where questions are conveniently answered. There's a
handy link to a website where some DDS/JDs have important information.
Anyone who does not know what a DDS/JD is, need not iknow.
Cheers,
Joel
-------------
>>http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Station/6000/
>>http://www.consultclarity.com/blazing/
>>http://www.midnightcafe.com/alzh/
>>http://neuro-www.mgh.harvard.edu/forum/
>>http://www.it-city.com/research/
>>http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pcsol/
>>http://www.santel.lu/SANTEL/dentistry/dentistry.html
>I will look but most are bogus reports by ignorant people. I do not
>mean this as disparagement. They just are ill-informed.
>Cheers,
>Joel
>----
>>You might consider looking into joining this organization if you really
>care
>>about the issue:
>>http://www.iaomt.org/
>>Please see also - my posting "just a case report on amalgam" transplanted
>>from alt.health.dental-amalgam newsgroup.
>>Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>news:7vd53r$5q5$1...@fir.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>>>I NEVER HAD ANOTHER EPILEPTIC SEIZURE AFTER THAT DAY.
>>An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
Joel M. Eichen
>When I read stories like this it just makes me very uncomfortable. I don't
>know a single dentist that has ever done poor dentistry on purpose, and I have
>worked for some poor dentists!
True! Most dentists are quite dedicated.
> Not a single one would put anything in the
>mouth of their patient's that he wouldn't put in the mouth of his own family
>member (even the ones that he likes).
>DivaLove, you should be hollering from the tree tops to little kids and
>teenagers to brush and floss their little heads off so that they don't have to
>be in a position where amalgam has to be used.
Good good point!
> You should be going to schools
>and talking about cleaning teeth and gums, teaching others how to avoid the
>"toxic" substances that dentistry uses to fill cavities. Argueing with the
>fine dentists on this list is the wrong place for you to use this kind of
>energy. It is not just you, all of the anti amalgamists that "know" that
>mercury leaks out of silver fillings should take this advice.
>Do some research on what the research says about topical fluoride, and xylitol,
>and plaque control. And share THAT story.
Thanks for a positive spin! Dental workers are the greatest!
Cheers,
Joel
-----
pon...@my-deja.com
Pontic " Nobles obligerant pas."
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Renate Ratlos
wrote:
>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>
>>I NEVER HAD ANOTHER EPILEPTIC SEIZURE AFTER THAT DAY.
>
>An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
>ANY disease and amalgam!
You would not see one it it hit you with a hammer.
Renate Ratlos
wrote:
>>It is criminal. And now please count how many politicians and managers
>>of health insurances companies do know this very well, AND STILL keep
>>on thumbing patients down?
>
>This is incorrect. No insurance company turns thumbs down. If a
>filling looks the slightest bit corroded or uneven, the dentist
>replaces it with no questions asked.
Wrong.
Renate Ratlos
wrote:
>I will look but most are bogus reports by ignorant people. I do not
>mean this as disparagement.
>They just are ill-informed.
Might very well be that they are very ill-informed. But don't forget
that you know less than they do.
Renate Ratlos
RDH) wrote:
>DivaLove, you should be hollering from the tree tops to little kids and
>teenagers to brush and floss their little heads off so that they don't have to
>be in a position where amalgam has to be used.
Don't try to sneak away. The problem EXISTS. Even if not even one new
filling would be necdessary from now on, there are hundreds of
millions of amalgam fillings already in existance!
> You should be going to schools
>and talking about cleaning teeth and gums, teaching others how to avoid the
>"toxic" substances that dentistry uses to fill cavities.
Don't try to sneak away. The problem EXISTS. Even if not even one new
filling would be necdessary from now on, there are hundreds of
millions of amalgam fillings already in existance!
>Argueing with the fine dentists on this list is the wrong place
Rubbish.
>for you to use this kind of energy.
Rubbish.
>It is not just you, all of the anti amalgamists that "know" that
>mercury leaks out of silver fillings should take this advice.
Don't try to sneak away. The problem EXISTS. Even if not even one new
filling would be necdessary from now on, there are hundreds of
millions of amalgam fillings already in existance!
>Do some research on what the research says about topical fluoride, and xylitol,
>and plaque control. And share THAT story.
Don't try to sneak away. The problem EXISTS. Even if not even one new
filling would be necdessary from now on, there are hundreds of
millions of amalgam fillings already in existance!
>The harder you work, the luckier you are.
Rubbish.
Renate Ratlos
wrote:
>Is composite really THAT much more expensive than MERCURY?
Yes. It can cost your teeth.
Renate Ratlos
<da...@longnightsmakeswedesfunny.com> wrote:
>I have a story.
No. You dumped a pile of rubbish into this ng.
Renate Ratlos
wrote:
>This site particular encourages mass hysteria.
Yours?
ar...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>
>>I NEVER HAD ANOTHER EPILEPTIC SEIZURE AFTER THAT DAY.
>
>An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
>ANY disease and amalgam!
NOT as long as NO serious epidemiologist has ever investigated a
possible correlation between the broad spectrum of GENERAL HEALTH
PROBLEMS that can be caused by a radiomimic poison like mercury.
So, this is no excuse at all.
arie
>Cheers,
>
>Joel
Renate Ratlos
wrote:
>In my own state (Hawaii) alone:
>(from http://www.lava.net/~hda/leg4.html
>
>FREEDOM OF CHOICE
>
>
>The "Freedom of Choice" bill, SB 2594, was "held" in committee, in other
>words, killed for lack of support from the Senate Consumer Protection
>Committee, chaired by Senators Wayne Metcalf and David Ige. The House
>version of the "Freedom of Choice" bill, HB 3105, was also "killed" in the
>House Health Committee chaired by Representative Alex Santiago.
>
>What can we do?
Have a nice chat with these irresponsible politicians...
ar...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>
>>An open mind is all I ask.
>>:)
>
>>Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>news:7vd886$63h$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>
>>>Here's some research for you to do Joel, and this compilation took me only
>>>2-3 hours of doing simple internet searches on Mercury, Amalgam, Dentistry:
>>>http://www.amalgam.org/
>>>http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/amalgamclassaction
>>>http://web-maker.com/dihi/index.html
>>>http://web-maker.com/dihi/index.html
>
>This site particular encourages mass hysteria.
China government says that this new religious movement also is mass
hysteria. Every institution, when faced with a big crowd, first
reverts to designating it as mass hysteria.
arie
>Its complete with a
>message board where questions are conveniently answered. There's a
>handy link to a website where some DDS/JDs have important information.
>Anyone who does not know what a DDS/JD is, need not iknow.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Joel
>
>-------------
>
>>>http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Station/6000/
>>>http://www.consultclarity.com/blazing/
>>>http://www.midnightcafe.com/alzh/
>>>http://neuro-www.mgh.harvard.edu/forum/
>>>http://www.it-city.com/research/
>>>http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pcsol/
>>>http://www.santel.lu/SANTEL/dentistry/dentistry.html
>
>>I will look but most are bogus reports by ignorant people. I do not
>>mean this as disparagement. They just are ill-informed.
>
>>Cheers,
>
>>Joel
>
>>----
>
>
>
>>>You might consider looking into joining this organization if you really
>>care
>>>about the issue:
>>>http://www.iaomt.org/
>
>>>Please see also - my posting "just a case report on amalgam" transplanted
>>>from alt.health.dental-amalgam newsgroup.
>
>
>>>Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>news:7vd53r$5q5$1...@fir.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>>>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>>I NEVER HAD ANOTHER EPILEPTIC SEIZURE AFTER THAT DAY.
>
>>>An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
>>>ANY disease and amalgam!
>
>>>Cheers,
>
>>>Joel
>
>>>--------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
ar...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>shir...@aol.commonly (Shirley Gutkowski RDH) wrote:
>
>>When I read stories like this it just makes me very uncomfortable. I don't
>>know a single dentist that has ever done poor dentistry on purpose, and I have
>>worked for some poor dentists!
>
>True! Most dentists are quite dedicated.
Tears appear in my eyes :)
>> Not a single one would put anything in the
>>mouth of their patient's that he wouldn't put in the mouth of his own family
>>member (even the ones that he likes).
>
>>DivaLove, you should be hollering from the tree tops to little kids and
>>teenagers to brush and floss their little heads off so that they don't have to
>>be in a position where amalgam has to be used.
>
>Good good point!
Would be comfortable to have the subject changed, isn't it?
>> You should be going to schools
>>and talking about cleaning teeth and gums, teaching others how to avoid the
>>"toxic" substances that dentistry uses to fill cavities. Argueing with the
>>fine dentists on this list is the wrong place for you to use this kind of
>>energy. It is not just you, all of the anti amalgamists that "know" that
>>mercury leaks out of silver fillings should take this advice.
>>Do some research on what the research says about topical fluoride, and xylitol,
>>and plaque control. And share THAT story.
>
>Thanks for a positive spin! Dental workers are the greatest!
for the dentists.... that is
arie
>Cheers,
>
>Joel
>
>-----
>
>
>
>
>>Shirley Gutkowski, RDH
ar...@hotmail.com
RDH) wrote:
>When I read stories like this it just makes me very uncomfortable. I don't
>know a single dentist that has ever done poor dentistry on purpose, and I have
>worked for some poor dentists! Not a single one would put anything in the
>mouth of their patient's that he wouldn't put in the mouth of his own family
>member (even the ones that he likes).
It's not about the dentists doing poor work on purpose, it's about the
continuous use of mercury in dentistry. Mercury leaks from amalgam in
toxic amounts above 6 fillings in one mouth. That's all. As soon as a
dentist has been informed of this, he should (try to) stop the use of
amalgam, urge for better research on the metabolic pathway followed by
mercury in the body and of the GI-tract absorption rate, as these are
the most ill-understood parts of the whole problem. In the mean time,
risk analyses have shown that mercury from amalgam fillings poses a
health risk. Period.
Once informed of this, a dentist should be cautious with applying
amalgam in teeth, and should not be bloating around that 'no single
disease has been caused by amalgam'. Mercury poisoning from amalgam is
a chronic problem, not an acute one. So dentists who try to confuse
the discussion with this trick are 'bad dentists' in my view.
>DivaLove, you should be hollering from the tree tops to little kids and
>teenagers to brush and floss their little heads off so that they don't have to
>be in a position where amalgam has to be used. You should be going to schools
>and talking about cleaning teeth and gums, teaching others how to avoid the
>"toxic" substances that dentistry uses to fill cavities.
This is a completely other problem of which state and dental
associations should take care. Once people found out that they are
being poisoned (and after all this knowledge has been gathered about
amalgam, it's on purpose now!) by these 'fine dentists' who have
always been (uninformed as they maybe were) lying that 'no amalgam
leaks from the fillings', they have the right to tell that here!
> Argueing with the
>fine dentists on this list is the wrong place for you to use this kind of
>energy. It is not just you, all of the anti amalgamists that "know" that
>mercury leaks out of silver fillings should take this advice.
Funny, why do you put 'know' between quotes? You still don't know that
mercury leaks from amalgam fillings?
>Do some research on what the research says about topical fluoride, and xylitol,
>and plaque control. And share THAT story.
Don't change the subject :)
arie
The less you "know", the luckier you are ;-)
Dr. Hal Dawl
news:38275cae...@news1.ewetel.de...
> No. You dumped a pile of rubbish into this ng.
Your subtle intellect is unnerving.
Joel M. Eichen
>On Sat, 30 Oct 1999 00:48:36 GMT, jo...@earthlink.net (Joel M. Eichen)
>wrote:
>>shir...@aol.commonly (Shirley Gutkowski RDH) wrote:
>>
>>>When I read stories like this it just makes me very uncomfortable. I don't
>>>know a single dentist that has ever done poor dentistry on purpose, and I have
>>>worked for some poor dentists!
>>
>>True! Most dentists are quite dedicated.
>Tears appear in my eyes :)
Interestingly, at sci.med.dentistry where dentists share there time
about what thet have spent years learning, Arie jokes!
Too bad.
>>> Not a single one would put anything in the
>>>mouth of their patient's that he wouldn't put in the mouth of his own family
>>>member (even the ones that he likes).
>>
>>>DivaLove, you should be hollering from the tree tops to little kids and
>>>teenagers to brush and floss their little heads off so that they don't have to
>>>be in a position where amalgam has to be used.
>>
>>Good good point!
>Would be comfortable to have the subject changed, isn't it?
>>> You should be going to schools
>>>and talking about cleaning teeth and gums, teaching others how to avoid the
>>>"toxic" substances that dentistry uses to fill cavities. Argueing with the
>>>fine dentists on this list is the wrong place for you to use this kind of
>>>energy. It is not just you, all of the anti amalgamists that "know" that
>>>mercury leaks out of silver fillings should take this advice.
>>>Do some research on what the research says about topical fluoride, and xylitol,
>>>and plaque control. And share THAT story.
>>
>>Thanks for a positive spin! Dental workers are the greatest!
>for the dentists.... that is
>arie
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Joel
>>
>>-----
>>
>>
>>
>>
Joel M. Eichen
>On Sat, 30 Oct 1999 00:46:48 GMT, jo...@earthlink.net (Joel M. Eichen)
>wrote:
>>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>>
>>>An open mind is all I ask.
>>>:)
>>
>>>Joel M. Eichen <jo...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>news:7vd886$63h$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>>>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>Here's some research for you to do Joel, and this compilation took me only
>>>>2-3 hours of doing simple internet searches on Mercury, Amalgam, Dentistry:
>>>>http://www.amalgam.org/
>>>>http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/amalgamclassaction
>>>>http://web-maker.com/dihi/index.html
>>>>http://web-maker.com/dihi/index.html
>>
>>This site particular encourages mass hysteria.
Read it! It for the lawyer/dentists to drum up business!
Joel M. Eichen
>On 30 Oct 1999 00:20:46 GMT, shir...@aol.commonly (Shirley Gutkowski
>RDH) wrote:
>>DivaLove, you should be hollering from the tree tops to little kids and
>>teenagers to brush and floss their little heads off so that they don't have to
>>be in a position where amalgam has to be used.
Unfortunately, patients do not heed patients advice to prevent
cavities. Still, we offer treatment to avoid losing teeth. That's
Shirley's point.
Arie says:
>Don't try to sneak away. The problem EXISTS. Even if not even one new
>filling would be necessary from now on, there are hundreds of
>millions of amalgam fillings already in existance!
>> You should be going to schools
>>and talking about cleaning teeth and gums, teaching others how to avoid the
>>"toxic" substances that dentistry uses to fill cavities.
>Don't try to sneak away. The problem EXISTS. Even if not even one new
>filling would be necdessary from now on, there are hundreds of
>millions of amalgam fillings already in existance!
>>Argueing with the fine dentists on this list is the wrong place
>Rubbish.
>>for you to use this kind of energy.
>Rubbish.
>>It is not just you, all of the anti amalgamists that "know" that
>>mercury leaks out of silver fillings should take this advice.
>Don't try to sneak away. The problem EXISTS. Even if not even one new
>filling would be necdessary from now on, there are hundreds of
>millions of amalgam fillings already in existance!
>>Do some research on what the research says about topical fluoride, and xylitol,
>>and plaque control. And share THAT story.
>Don't try to sneak away. The problem EXISTS. Even if not even one new
>filling would be necdessary from now on, there are hundreds of
>millions of amalgam fillings already in existance!
>>The harder you work, the luckier you are.
>Rubbish.
Joel M. Eichen
>On Fri, 29 Oct 1999 22:00:19 GMT, jo...@earthlink.net (Joel M. Eichen)
>wrote:
>NOT as long as NO serious epidemiologist
Gee, I wonder why?
>has ever investigated a
>possible correlation between the broad spectrum of GENERAL HEALTH
>PROBLEMS that can be caused by a radiomimic poison like mercury.
>So, this is no excuse at all.
What's that radiomimic thing? Is that someone who sounds like a talk
program?
>arie
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Joel
Joel M. Eichen
>On Fri, 29 Oct 1999 22:00:19 GMT, jo...@earthlink.net (Joel M. Eichen)
>wrote:
>>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I NEVER HAD ANOTHER EPILEPTIC SEIZURE AFTER THAT DAY.
>>
>>An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
>>ANY disease and amalgam!
>You would not see one it it hit you with a hammer.
Can you name one?
Steve or Marie
Great post. My sentiments exactly.
The "amalgam wars" started almost 160 years ago, and amalgam is still
around. Right now, I wouldn't bet that composite resins will ring up any such
record of continuous use.
Several years ago, when I was president of my bicycle club (curiously,
dentists were heavily represented in the membership), our bulletin editor (a
computer guy) presumed to know more about filling materials, and the toxicity of
amalgam, than I did. After a long, frustrating conversation (mostly us talking
at each other than with each other--sound familiar?), he said he didn't expect
me to agree with him because I wasn't in the "health movement" (and I, by
implication, a member, I suppose, of some vast right wing conspiracy). I
realized then that no amount of reason would sway him. Any statistic I could
site was suspect, and all the training and clinical experience I had experienced
was totally for naught as far as he was concerned.
Of course, the issue of dental amalgam is by far not the only one
related to health and medicine that has been co-opted by those opposed to
prevailing medical opinion. Many of these mavericks are well meaning. A few
are even inspired. Many, though, are misinformed, and a few are preying on the
sick and the desperate.
Maybe some in our group can share their experiences with patients who
have been misinformed. How can we get our patients to listen, when there is
such an atmosphere of mistrust?
Steve
Hans Lennros
When I read through your long post I said to myself I must not answer since,
if I did, it might lead to any replies would deal with my thoughts & theories.
Okay, I realized you will get a bunch of stupid smart ass remarks by a few
narrow minds, and so you did.
But, all in all, you were not as badly treated as some, with experiences
similar to yours, have been around here. They have been told that their
problems is not a dental condition, but a mental one.
Fact is that I have treated many people like you. Not for their general
problems but for their bad amalgams. And after a while their general
symptoms started to go away.
In contrast to my opponents I do not believe that science know everything.
If so, why would we need research? Imagine a scientist 50 years ago
saying and believing what many dentists today seem to believe. I mean
that we know everything, and what we don't know does not exists.
(e.g. amalgam has no adverse effects)
No, a mind is just like a parachute (does not work if it is not open) which
I am sure you, as a pilote, know all about. I mean about the parachute...
One thing that striks me as odd is that pilots, especially on long distance
commercial airlines, seem to over-represented in this particular group where
removal of amalgam has general effects.
Bye for now,
Hans Lennros DDS
PS: I wonder one thing about those dentists who are thinking all amalgam
related problems are of psyciatric origin: that is; when they go to Europe,
how do they do ? They cannot fly (commercial airline pilots are nuts since
their health improves after amalgam removal) and they cannot go by boat;
I have had a number of see captains who have experienced they same thing.
Do you think they are good swimmers? ;-)
=================================================
DivaLove wrote:
This is a long post, but please, bear with me...I have a lot to say.
Shortly before High School graduation in 1970, at the insistance and expense
of my mother, who stated "you should start out your new life with good
teeth", I had extensive dental work done involving the amalgam restoration
of almost 40% of my teeth. My teeth (which were strong and had given me
NO pain up until this work was done) were deeply drilled and undercut and
packed tightly with mercury/amalgam fillings, mostly in the posterior teeth,
but including my upper left eye tooth, which was very deeply drilled and filled.
I began to notice some odd sensations, shortly after the work was completed,
dizzyness and tunnelvision and numbness of my extremities were the most
notable. 5 months later I joined the US Navy as a Wave, and left Hawaii for
I NEVER HAD ANOTHER EPILEPTIC SEIZURE AFTER THAT DAY.
I began to realize that there was a specific correllation between the time (at
Joel M. Eichen
>Hi DivaLove,
>When I read through your long post I said to myself I must not answer since,
>if I did, it might lead to any replies would deal with my thoughts & theories.
>Okay, I realized you will get a bunch of stupid smart ass remarks by a few
>narrow minds, and so you did.
I get it! If you do not believe hocus-pocus, you are narrow-minded.
>But, all in all, you were not as badly treated as some, with experiences
>similar to yours, have been around here. They have been told that their
>problems is not a dental condition, but a mental one.
You said it, we did not!
>Fact is that I have treated many people like you. Not for their general
>problems but for their bad amalgams. And after a while their general
>symptoms started to go away.
Hans Lenros, DDS, MD, Diplomat, National Academy of Psychiatry.
>In contrast to my opponents I do not believe that science know everything.
Kirlian photography works quite well.
>If so, why would we need research? Imagine a scientist 50 years ago
>saying and believing what many dentists today seem to believe. I mean
>that we know everything, and what we don't know does not exists.
>(e.g. amalgam has no adverse effects)
>No, a mind is just like a parachute (does not work if it is not open)
Clever. I never heard that one.
Joel M. Eichen
>Hal:
> Great post. My sentiments exactly.
> The "amalgam wars" started almost 160 years ago, and amalgam is still
>around. Right now, I wouldn't bet that composite resins will ring up any such
>record of continuous use.
> Several years ago, when I was president of my bicycle club (curiously,
>dentists were heavily represented in the membership), our bulletin editor (a
>computer guy) presumed to know more about filling materials, and the toxicity of
>amalgam, than I did. After a long, frustrating conversation (mostly us talking
>at each other than with each other--sound familiar?), he said he didn't expect
>me to agree with him because I wasn't in the "health movement"
Sounds like that wasn't the only movement that he was knee-deep in.
> (and I, by
>implication, a member, I suppose, of some vast right wing conspiracy). I
>realized then that no amount of reason would sway him.
I would have just smacked him.
Renate Ratlos
wrote:
>>>An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
>>>ANY disease and amalgam!
>
>>You would not see one it it hit you with a hammer.
>
>Can you name one?
Of course: tiredness.
--
Müdigkeit http://www.teleport.com/~ctseng/cfs_pages/index.html
Amalgam http://www.ariplex.com/ama/ama_p0.htm
Lyme_Disease http://www.ariplex.com/lyme/lyme_top.htm
Microsoft http://www.cultdeadcow.com
Dr. Hal Dawl
news:381B39FE...@redconnect.net...
> How can we get our patients to listen, when there is such an atmosphere
of mistrust?
I generally use cotton rolls. : )
Joel M. Eichen
Carefully placed in the dentist's ears. . . . .
Joel M. Eichen
>On Sat, 30 Oct 1999 11:55:07 GMT, jo...@earthlink.net (Joel M. Eichen)
>wrote:
>>>>An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
>>>>ANY disease and amalgam!
>>
>>>You would not see one it it hit you with a hammer.
>>
>>Can you name one?
>Of course: tiredness.
Worker: I need worker's compensation.
Boss: What disease?
Worker: Tiredness.
ar...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>ar...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 30 Oct 1999 00:48:36 GMT, jo...@earthlink.net (Joel M. Eichen)
>>wrote:
>
>>>shir...@aol.commonly (Shirley Gutkowski RDH) wrote:
>>>
>>>>When I read stories like this it just makes me very uncomfortable. I don't
>>>>know a single dentist that has ever done poor dentistry on purpose, and I have
>>>>worked for some poor dentists!
>>>
>>>True! Most dentists are quite dedicated.
>
>>Tears appear in my eyes :)
>
>Interestingly, at sci.med.dentistry where dentists share there time
>about what thet have spent years learning, Arie jokes!
arie learnt that from you :)
>Too bad.
Finally some insight.
arie
>>>> Not a single one would put anything in the
>>>>mouth of their patient's that he wouldn't put in the mouth of his own family
>>>>member (even the ones that he likes).
>>>
>>>>DivaLove, you should be hollering from the tree tops to little kids and
>>>>teenagers to brush and floss their little heads off so that they don't have to
>>>>be in a position where amalgam has to be used.
>>>
>>>Good good point!
>
>>Would be comfortable to have the subject changed, isn't it?
>
>>>> You should be going to schools
>>>>and talking about cleaning teeth and gums, teaching others how to avoid the
>>>>"toxic" substances that dentistry uses to fill cavities. Argueing with the
>>>>fine dentists on this list is the wrong place for you to use this kind of
>>>>energy. It is not just you, all of the anti amalgamists that "know" that
>>>>mercury leaks out of silver fillings should take this advice.
>>>>Do some research on what the research says about topical fluoride, and xylitol,
>>>>and plaque control. And share THAT story.
>>>
>>>Thanks for a positive spin! Dental workers are the greatest!
>
>>for the dentists.... that is
>
>>arie
>
>>>Cheers,
>>>
>>>Joel
>>>
>>>-----
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Shirley Gutkowski, RDH
ar...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>renate...@bigfoot.com (Renate Ratlos ) wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 29 Oct 1999 22:00:19 GMT, jo...@earthlink.net (Joel M. Eichen)
>>wrote:
>
>>>"DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I NEVER HAD ANOTHER EPILEPTIC SEIZURE AFTER THAT DAY.
>>>
>>>An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
>>>ANY disease and amalgam!
>
>>You would not see one it it hit you with a hammer.
>
>Can you name one?
BANG!
arie :-)
Eaton T. Fores
Renate Ratlos wrote in message <38275cae...@news1.ewetel.de>...
<more gibberish>
Renate, let me ask you a question: do you need a lobotomy, or have you
already had one?
I ask because your posts would be so similar either way.
ETF
Chamberlain
long it's been since you opened up a textbook on operative dentistry or read an
article in a journal ?
Joe Chamberlain.
Renate Ratlos wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:16:46 -1000, "DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Is composite really THAT much more expensive than MERCURY?
>
> Yes. It can cost your teeth.
>
> --
Hans Lennros
Renate wrote:
>You dumped a pile of rubbish into this ng.
You wrote:
>Your subtle intellect is unnerving.
But it was rubbish - by all known standards.
Hans Lennros
>Renate, do you need a lobotomy, or have you already had one?
Still into pshyco things. Must be something that is very close to you.
>I ask because your posts would be so similar either way.
And yours and Hal's always come in pairs .........
Hans Lennros
Dr. Hal Dawl
>I generally use cotton rolls.
Don't stick them too far into your ears. They will meet.
Chamberlain
Every material has its inherent characteristics and they must be observed. Just as with wisdom teeth removal, implant placement and so many other procedures we perform routinely, composites also have a protocol that must be followed for their placement. We don't stop placing implants because we think it is too time consuming to place them. We don't stop removing third molars because we think it is too troublesome. So why should we stop placing composite restorations, and use amalgam instead ?
I am tired of reading these same discussions time and time again. I have placed several posts proving that composites are not much more expensive than amalgam. They require the adherence to a strict protocol for their placement. But I have been doing it for a number of years and I can say that by now I am so much used to rubber dam isolation and the routine for composite placement that it takes me just about the same amount of time it takes to make an amalgam restoration.
Composites are not considered to be a esthetic material anymore. They are currently considered to be as resistant to abrasion as amalgam restorations (or very close to! - close enough to be used safely in posterior teeth!). Some researchers in the U.S. say that the combination of composites and the hybridization of dentine through the use of a 4th or 5th generation dental adhesives (such as Bisco's All Bond 2 or One Step) can strengthen the tooth structure and make it as strong as it was before it was destroyed by caries (tooth decay). Amalgam can't do that! In theory it can be bonded to the tooth structure, but most dentists who refuse to do composites because they are more time consuming and require more expertise, don't take the time to bond amalgam restorations to the tooth structure. Then it works as a wedge! I believe most of you realize that (or at least should!).
So why shouldn't we place composites in place of amalgams regularly ?
I will tell you what I think the reason is: CONVENIENCE !
It's time to change. Even if there is no apparent reason at this time to switch from amalgam to composites, the sole argument that there has been a great deal of controversy surrounding the toxicity of amalgam should be enough to prompt a change in behavior. We all should proceed with caution until we have more proofs that amalgam is indeed risk free and safe. We do have another viable alternative: Composites.
Joe Chamberlain
Joel M. Eichen
>You must have never used composite in order to make such insane statement. How
>long it's been since you opened up a textbook on operative dentistry or read an
>article in a journal ?
Hi Joe,
Many posts are made by non-dentists who only have a vague idea about
dentistry. As we dentists know, composite technology is only slightly
more expensive than amalgam technology, when one adds in all of the
disposables and little bottles of stuff (expensive too!)
Then again, there is a bit more time involved - technique is more
critical, including isolation from moisture.
Cheers,
Joel
Joel M. Eichen, D.D.S.
---
I know that you already know this. This is added for background
information for others.
Joel M. Eichen
>--------------27D6D7F5A0A307E3A6FF8C32
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> I can't tell how many times I have read arguments for the reasons why
>dentists prefer to use amalgam over composite. But I find it to be absolutely
>ridiculous to transfer to the patients one's lack of professional talent or
>aptitude. Knowing how who to do composite restorations right (i.e. using rubber
>dam isolation) is the obligation of every dentist who keeps his office doors
>opened. IT IS NOT AN OPTION !
Far as I know, every dentist is highly skilled with composites and
rubber dam. You cannot be implying that this is like brain surgery,
can you?
> Every material has its inherent characteristics and they must be
>observed. Just as with wisdom teeth removal, implant placement and so many other
>procedures we perform routinely, composites also have a protocol that must be
>followed for their placement. We don't stop placing implants because we think it
>is too time consuming to place them. We don't stop removing third molars because
>we think it is too troublesome. So why should we stop placing composite
>restorations, and use amalgam instead ?
Because a MODBL amalgam will work for many years.
A MODBL inlay will work for many years. A crown can also be used. A
MODBL composite often will not work out! Its economics. We have lots
of people who extract teeth because Mr. Cosmetics Dentist told the
patient it might cost $1,500 to fix the tooth. An amalgam for $50 or
$60 will often stay there for many years.
> I am tired of reading these same discussions time and time again.
ANSWER: Stop opening posts that begin with, "I like amalgam because .
."
> I have
>placed several posts proving that composites are not much more expensive than
>amalgam.
Agreed.
> They require the adherence to a strict protocol for their placement.
>But I have been doing it for a number of years and I can say that by now I am so
>much used to rubber dam isolation and the routine for composite placement that
>it takes me just about the same amount of time it takes to make an amalgam
>restoration.
> Composites are not considered to be a esthetic material anymore. They
>are currently considered to be as resistant to abrasion as amalgam restorations
>(or very close to! - close enough to be used safely in posterior teeth!). Some
>researchers in the U.S. say that the combination of composites and the
>hybridization of dentine through the use of a 4th or 5th generation dental
>adhesives (such as Bisco's All Bond 2 or One Step) can strengthen the tooth
>structure and make it as strong as it was before it was destroyed by caries
>(tooth decay). Amalgam can't do that! In theory it can be bonded to the tooth
>structure, but most dentists who refuse to do composites because they are more
>time consuming and require more expertise, don't take the time to bond amalgam
>restorations to the tooth structure. Then it works as a wedge! I believe most of
>you realize that (or at least should!).
> So why shouldn't we place composites in place of amalgams regularly ?
Joe. How many crowns do you insert in a year? By your reconing, it
should be zero. I will bet it is more.
> I will tell you what I think the reason is: CONVENIENCE !
> It's time to change. Even if there is no apparent reason at this time to
>switch from amalgam to composites, the sole argument that there has been a great
>deal of controversy surrounding the toxicity of amalgam should be enough to
>prompt a change in behavior. We all should proceed with caution until we have
>more proofs that amalgam is indeed risk free and safe.
As we should with composites too. Any fear about aromatic ring
compounds leaking out of methacrylate? That stuff is soft! You have
some fancy terms for it, but it is really methacrylate.
> Joe Chamberlain
>"Dr. Hal Dawl" wrote:
>--------------27D6D7F5A0A307E3A6FF8C32
>Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
><!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
><html>
> <font face="Garamond"> I can't
>tell how many times I have read arguments for the reasons why dentists
>prefer to use amalgam over composite. But I find it to be absolutely ridiculous
>to transfer to the patients one's lack of professional talent or aptitude.
>Knowing how who to do composite restorations right (i.e. using rubber dam
>isolation) is the obligation of every dentist who keeps his office doors
>opened. IT IS NOT AN OPTION !</font>
><br><font face="Garamond"> Every
>material has its inherent characteristics and they must be observed. Just
>as with wisdom teeth removal, implant placement and so many other procedures
>we perform routinely, composites also have a protocol that must be followed
>for their placement. We don't stop placing implants because we think it
>is too time consuming to place them. We don't stop removing third molars
>because we think it is too troublesome. So why should we stop placing composite
>restorations, and use amalgam instead ?</font>
><br><font face="Garamond"> I
>am tired of reading these same discussions time and time again. I have
>placed several posts proving that composites are not much more expensive
>than amalgam. They require the adherence to a strict protocol for
>their placement. But I have been doing it for a number of years and I can
>say that by now I am so much used to rubber dam isolation and the routine
>for composite placement that it takes me just about the same amount of
>time it takes to make an amalgam restoration.</font>
><br><font face="Garamond"> Composites
>are not considered to be a esthetic material anymore. They are currently
>considered to be as resistant to abrasion as amalgam restorations (or very
>close to! - close enough to be used safely in posterior teeth!). Some researchers
>in the U.S. say that the combination of composites and the hybridization
>of dentine through the use of a 4<sup>th</sup> or 5<sup>th</sup> generation
>dental adhesives (such as Bisco's All Bond 2 or One Step) can strengthen
>the tooth structure and make it as strong as it was before it was destroyed
>by caries (tooth decay). Amalgam can't do that! In theory it can
>be bonded to the tooth structure, but most dentists who refuse to do composites
>because they are more time consuming and require more expertise, don't
>take the time to bond amalgam restorations to the tooth structure. Then
>it works as a wedge! I believe most of you realize that (or at least should!).</font>
><br><font face="Garamond"> So
>why shouldn't we place composites in place of amalgams regularly ?</font>
><br><font face="Garamond"> I
>will tell you what I think the reason is: CONVENIENCE !</font>
><br><font face="Garamond"> It's
>time to change. Even if there is no <u>apparent</u> reason at this time
>to switch from amalgam to composites, the sole argument that there has
>been a great deal of controversy surrounding the toxicity of amalgam should
>be enough to prompt a change in behavior. We all should proceed with caution
>until we have more proofs that amalgam is indeed risk free and safe. We
>do have another viable alternative: Composites.</font>
><br><font face="Garamond"> </font>
><br><font face="Garamond"> Joe
>Chamberlain</font>
><p>"Dr. Hal Dawl" wrote:
><blockquote TYPE=CITE>DivaLove <pua...@flex.com> wrote in message
><br><a href="news:381a05ef@coconut-wireless">news:381a05ef@coconut-wireless</a>...
><br>> Sheeze!! Of Course NOT! I advocate the removal of ALL Mercury/Amalgam
><br>> fillings.
><p>I have a story. I took over my practice from a dentist who is
>now in his
><br>80s. He placed a lot of amalgam restorations in his time and
>did thousands
><br>the old fashioned way: squeezing the excess mercury out by hand.
>He is in
><br>very good health.
><p>I retained a good number of his patients and still have a number (or
>their
><br>progeny). Many of them are in their 80s and 90s and are relatively
>healthy.
><br>Some have of the usual diseases of old age.
><p>Well, a long time ago, many of these people had uncomfortable teeth.
>My
><br>predecessor took care of the real bad ones by removing them and replacing
><br>them with artificial teeth. However, most of the teeth with cavities
>were
><br>successfully treated with amalgam restorations and many are still extant
>and
><br>serviceable. Because of his skill and good service, these people
>(and there
><br>are plenty of them) have enjoy a lifetime of using their own teeth
>without
><br>discomfort and with minimal esthetic harm (usually only a problem when
>they
><br>yawn, which they do a lot of nowadays, given their age).
><p>I still place amalgam restorations because they are good, safe, and
>cheap.
><br>I do a lot of the fancier tooth-colored fillings, but that's only because
><br>the materials that are becoming available are getting much better.
>However,
><br>there is still a problem. They are over used and many dentists
>can't do
><br>them right. They are difficult to do and if you don't do them
>with strict
><br>isolation and painstaking attention to technique, they don't last very
>long
><br>at all. So I get new patients all the time who I happily do root
>canals and
><br>crowns (big stuff) because the tooth-colored materials are so-so for
>general
><br>use by general dentists. Some dentists do a fine job putting
>them in, but,
><br>in my not so humble opinion, a lot of them don't. I think this
>will change.
><br>I think the public will benefit from newer, more durable materials
>and
><br>dentists who do a better job putting them in (or maybe putting them
>in will
><br>get a whole lot easier). Then we will have other toxins to worry
>about, but
><br>that's another story.
><p>I still think the best restoration is no restoration: preventing
>tooth
><br>decay and gum disease should be the focus of dentists, hygienists,
>and
><br>patients. However, will still be tooth decay for some time and
>most of
><br>those teeth will be restored to health by amalgam restorations for
>some
><br>time.
><p>For every anecdote about ill-effects from amalgams, there are millions
>and
><br>millions of people with no ill-effects who have enjoyed years of good
><br>service and comfortable teeth. Those comfortable choppers will
>help them
><br>live longer because they will be able to eat better. They will
>live into
><br>their 80s, 90s, and 100s and will be grateful that their dentists did
>a good
><br>job without harming them.
><p>Something to think about, no?</blockquote>
></html>
>--------------27D6D7F5A0A307E3A6FF8C32--
Hans Lennros
>I have a story. I took over my practice from a dentist who is now in
>his 80s. He placed a lot of amalgam restorations in his time and
>did thousands the old fashioned way: squeezing the excess mercury
>out by hand. He is in very good health.
Heureka ! Zugumba has just found the ultimate proof of
why amalgam is totally harmless.
>However, most of the teeth with cavities were successfully treated with
>amalgam restorations and many are still extant and serviceable.
Missing the point. The outstanding functionality of amalgam is no issue.
>only problem when they yawn, which they do a lot of nowadays, given their age
No, the yawning must be an amalgam syndrom....
>I still place amalgam restorations because they are good, safe, and cheap.
Tautology !
>I do a lot of the fancier tooth-colored fillings
So they are fancy, and that's why you do them ...
>They are over used and many dentists can't do them right.
Which you can, I presume.
>They are difficult to do
No, they are not.
> Some dentists do a fine job putting them in, but, in my not so humble
> opinion, a lot of them don't.
And this is why amalgam should be used? Since you are using amalgam
you must be one of those guys you refer to in your not so humle opinion.
>Then we will have other toxins to worry about, but that's another story.
Show me a dentist, besides yourself, how also is a toxicologist !
(I take it you are certified toxicologist to know all that you say you know)
>I still think the best restoration is no restoration:
Halelulja. But what if there is decay?
Hans
Hans Lennros
Hans wrote:
>They have been told that their problems is not
>a dental condition, but a mental one.
Joel wrote:
>You said it, we did not!
You did, Joel, and I have a copy of your post to prove it.
Joel M. Eichen
>Hi Joel,
>Hans wrote:
>>They have been told that their problems is not
>>a dental condition, but a mental one.
>Joel wrote:
>>You said it, we did not!
>You did, Joel, and I have a copy of your post to prove it.
Maybe, but I have reformed!
Renate Ratlos
<fug...@yeah.right.sure> wrote:
>Renate, let me ask you a question: do you need a lobotomy, or have you
>already had one?
You want to sell yours?
Renate Ratlos
Sucked up by the vacuum.
Renate Ratlos
<chamb...@cruiser.com.br> wrote:
>You must have never used composite in order to make such insane statement. How
>long it's been since you opened up a textbook on operative dentistry or read an
>article in a journal ?
Ask a dentist. But a good one!
>Joe Chamberlain.
>
>Renate Ratlos wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:16:46 -1000, "DivaLove" <pua...@flex.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Is composite really THAT much more expensive than MERCURY?
>>
>> Yes. It can cost your teeth.
>>
>> --
>> The most famous email addresses:
>> B...@government.go.uk the.one-le...@transrapid.de
>> know.th...@nasa.org the.two-ar...@bundesregierung.de
>> make.your.own...@home.jp make....@dentist.rulez.borg
--
Renate Ratlos
wrote:
>renate...@bigfoot.com (Renate Ratlos ) wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 30 Oct 1999 11:55:07 GMT, jo...@earthlink.net (Joel M. Eichen)
>>wrote:
>
>>>>>An amazing coincidence. There is no epidemiologic correlation between
>>>>>ANY disease and amalgam!
>>>
>>>>You would not see one it it hit you with a hammer.
>>>
>>>Can you name one?
>
>>Of course: tiredness.
>
>Worker: I need worker's compensation.
>
>Boss: What disease?
>
>Worker: Tiredness.
Rubbish.
Hans Lennros
You wrote:
>Maybe, but I have reformed!
As of when ?
Last week?
Or was it yesterday?
Maybe even early this morning.
Hans
=============================
Hans Lennros wrote:
>They have been told that their problems is not a dental condition,
>but a mental one.
Joel wrote:
>You said it, we did not!
Hans wrote:
>You did, Joel, and I have a copy of your post to prove it.
Chamberlain
"Joel M. Eichen" wrote:
Far as I know, every dentist is highly skilled with composites and
rubber dam. You cannot be implying that this is like brain surgery,
can you?
If not so, why are most dentists so reluctant in replacing amalgam by composite ? If you think about it, the arguments are always the same: composites are more time consuming; composites are trickier; composites are more technique sensitive; composites are "a lot" more expensive (when we know they are not so);
Because a MODBL amalgam will work for many years.A MODBL inlay will work for many years. A crown can also be used. A
MODBL composite often will not work out! Its economics. We have lots
of people who extract teeth because Mr. Cosmetics Dentist told the
patient it might cost $1,500 to fix the tooth. An amalgam for $50 or
$60 will often stay there for many years.
First, if it is an MODBL than it is not an inlay;
It is a crown. Second, a crown can not be used; a crown "must" be used.
The fact that a composite "MODBL" will not work out has got nothing to
do with economics. And nothing to do with dentistry either ! Composites
are just about as well suited for a crown as amalgam is. In fact, there
several different laboratory processed composite-type indirect restorative
resins that could be used as a crown, as long as the conditions and circumstances
allowed. If amalgam was that good, don't you think it would've been used
as such by now ? The material is simply not strong enough. It is not indicated
for such procedures. I can do a directly placed composite restoration for
the same U$ 50 or U$ 60 you charge for amalgam.
ANSWER: Stop opening posts that begin with, "I like amalgam because .
."
I can't help it ! It is right there in front of me and it is wrong !
> I have
>placed several posts proving that composites are not much more expensive than
>amalgam.Agreed.
> They require the adherence to a strict protocol for their placement.
>But I have been doing it for a number of years and I can say that by now I am so
>much used to rubber dam isolation and the routine for composite placement that
>it takes me just about the same amount of time it takes to make an amalgam
>restoration.
> Composites are not considered to be a esthetic material anymore. They
>are currently considered to be as resistant to abrasion as amalgam restorations
>(or very close to! - close enough to be used safely in posterior teeth!). Some
>researchers in the U.S. say that the combination of composites and the
>hybridization of dentine through the use of a 4th or 5th generation dental
>adhesives (such as Bisco's All Bond 2 or One Step) can strengthen the tooth
>structure and make it as strong as it was before it was destroyed by caries
>(tooth decay). Amalgam can't do that! In theory it can be bonded to the tooth
>structure, but most dentists who refuse to do composites because they are more
>time consuming and require more expertise, don't take the time to bond amalgam
>restorations to the tooth structure. Then it works as a wedge! I believe most of
>you realize that (or at least should!).
> So why shouldn't we place composites in place of amalgams regularly ?Joe. How many crowns do you insert in a year? By your reconing, it
should be zero. I will bet it is more.
I fail to see your point ! I place more crowns in a year than I can count. I am proud to say that I have patients from all walks of life. From the poor to the wealthy, I am always there to help each one with the best I can do according to their possibilities. Isn't this what health care is about ? I do gold and other noble alloy crowns; base metal crowns; PFM crowns; Porcelain Inlays, Onlays, Overlays and Veneers; Laboratory processed composite-type indirect restorations; directly placed composites; and a number of others. I also used to do amalgams. I think it's a great material to work with. It's very forgiving (as far as technique is concerned) and very versatile. But, in light of our current scientific knowledge, its safety is controversial and suspected to be a health hazard. Read carefully what I am writing. I am not saying it is not safe. But the uncertainty is enough to make me step back and avoid it's use.
.As we should with composites too. Any fear about aromatic ring
compounds leaking out of methacrylate? That stuff is soft! You have
some fancy terms for it, but it is really methacrylate.
Best Regards,
Joe Chamberlain.
Joel M. Eichen
>--------------01BA468F9DC0BD245C52774F
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Hi Joel:
>"Joel M. Eichen" wrote:
>> Far as I know, every dentist is highly skilled with composites and
>> rubber dam. You cannot be implying that this is like brain surgery,
>> can you?
>If not so, why are most dentists so reluctant in replacing amalgam by composite ?
Sensitivity experienced by some patients.
>If you
>think about it, the arguments are always the same: composites are more time consuming;
>composites are trickier; composites are more technique sensitive; composites are "a lot"
>more expensive (when we know they are not so);
>> Because a MODBL amalgam will work for many years.
>>
>> A MODBL inlay will work for many years. A crown can also be used. A
>> MODBL composite often will not work out! Its economics. We have lots
>> of people who extract teeth because Mr. Cosmetics Dentist told the
>> patient it might cost $1,500 to fix the tooth. An amalgam for $50 or
>> $60 will often stay there for many years.
>First, if it is an MODBL than it is not an inlay; It is a crown.
Actually, A MODBL onlay is . . . well, a MODBL onlay. I mentioned this
because too many people have at least one back tooth where you can
scacely see the tooth structure - all filling!
Bet you can't remove that and replace it with composite!
>Second, a crown can not
>be used; a crown "must" be used.
I see that you do not have too many average people (median income in
US - $33,000) with 4 children.
>The fact that a composite "MODBL" will not work out has
>got nothing to do with economics. And nothing to do with dentistry either ! Composites are
>just about as well suited for a crown as amalgam is. In fact, there several different
>laboratory processed composite-type indirect restorative resins that could be used as a
>crown, as long as the conditions and circumstances allowed.
What do you charge the patient for the laboratory-processed, 2-step
restoration?
> If amalgam was that good,
>don't you think it would've been used as such by now ?
Get it? It is used and reusued by millions - 200 million last year
alone!
>The material is simply not strong
>enough. It is not indicated for such procedures. I can do a directly placed composite
>restoration for the same U$ 50 or U$ 60 you charge for amalgam.
MODBL?
Don't think so! Yeh, I have done a few of them too, but for durability
analgam is far better.
I have found that amalgam-free offices are not "mainly composite
offices," they are mainly porcelain inlay, artglass inlay, and crown
offices!
Cheers,
Joel
>Best Regards,
>Joe Chamberlain.
>--------------01BA468F9DC0BD245C52774F
>Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
><!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
><html>
>Hi Joel:
><br>
><br>
><p>"Joel M. Eichen" wrote:
><blockquote TYPE=CITE><i>Far as I know, every dentist is highly skilled
>with composites and</i>
><br><i>rubber dam. You cannot be implying that this is like brain surgery,</i>
><br><i>can you?</i></blockquote>
><font face="Garamond">If not so, why are most dentists so reluctant in
>replacing amalgam by composite ? If you think about it, the arguments are
>always the same: composites are more time consuming; composites are trickier;
>composites are more technique sensitive; composites are "a lot" more expensive
>(when we know they are not so);</font>
><blockquote TYPE=CITE><i>Because a MODBL amalgam will work for many years.</i>
><p><i>A MODBL inlay will work for many years. A crown can also be used.
>A</i>
><br><i>MODBL composite often will not work out! Its economics. We
>have lots</i>
><br><i>of people who extract teeth because Mr. Cosmetics Dentist told the</i>
><br><i>patient it might cost $1,500 to fix the tooth. An amalgam for $50
>or</i>
><br><i>$60 will often stay there for many years.</i></blockquote>
><font face="Garamond">First, if it is an MODBL than it is not an inlay;
>It is a crown. Second, a crown can not be used; a crown "must" be used.
>The fact that a composite "MODBL" will not work out has got nothing to
>do with economics. And nothing to do with dentistry either ! Composites
>are just about as well suited for a crown as amalgam is. In fact, there
>several different laboratory processed composite-type indirect restorative
>resins that could be used as a crown, as long as the conditions and circumstances
>allowed. If amalgam was that good, don't you think it would've been used
>as such by now ? The material is simply not strong enough. It is not indicated
>for such procedures. I can do a directly placed composite restoration for
>the same U$ 50 or U$ 60 you charge for amalgam.</font>
><br>
><blockquote TYPE=CITE><i>ANSWER: Stop opening posts that begin with, "I
>like amalgam because .</i>
><br><i> ."</i></blockquote>
><font face="Garamond">I can't help it ! It is right there in front of me
>and it is wrong !</font>
><blockquote TYPE=CITE>> I have
><br>>placed several posts proving that composites are not much more expensive
>than
><br>>amalgam.
><p><i>Agreed.</i>
><p>> They require the adherence to a strict protocol for their placement.
><br>>But I have been doing it for a number of years and I can say that
>by now I am so
><br>>much used to rubber dam isolation and the routine for composite placement
>that
><br>>it takes me just about the same amount of time it takes to make an
>amalgam
><br>>restoration.
><br>> Composites are not considered
>to be a esthetic material anymore. They
><br>>are currently considered to be as resistant to abrasion as amalgam
>restorations
><br>>(or very close to! - close enough to be used safely in posterior teeth!).
>Some
><br>>researchers in the U.S. say that the combination of composites and
>the
><br>>hybridization of dentine through the use of a 4th or 5th generation
>dental
><br>>adhesives (such as Bisco's All Bond 2 or One Step) can strengthen
>the tooth
><br>>structure and make it as strong as it was before it was destroyed
>by caries
><br>>(tooth decay). Amalgam can't do that! In theory it can be bonded
>to the tooth
><br>>structure, but most dentists who refuse to do composites because they
>are more
><br>>time consuming and require more expertise, don't take the time to
>bond amalgam
><br>>restorations to the tooth structure. Then it works as a wedge! I believe
>most of
><br>>you realize that (or at least should!).
><br>> So why shouldn't we place
>composites in place of amalgams regularly ?
><p>Joe. How many crowns do you insert in a year? By your reconing, it
><br>should be zero. I will bet it is more.</blockquote>
><font face="Garamond">I fail to see your point ! I place more crowns in
>a year than I can count. I am proud to say that I have patients from all
>walks of life. From the poor to the wealthy, I am always there to help
>each one with the best I can do according to their possibilities. Isn't
>this what health care is about ? I do gold and other noble alloy crowns;
>base metal crowns; PFM crowns; Porcelain Inlays, Onlays, Overlays and Veneers;
>Laboratory processed composite-type indirect restorations; directly placed
>composites; and a number of others. I also used to do amalgams. I think
>it's a great material to work with. It's very forgiving (as far as technique
>is concerned) and very versatile. But, in light of our current scientific
>knowledge, its safety is controversial and suspected to be a health hazard.
>Read carefully what I am writing. I am not saying it is not safe. But the
>uncertainty is enough to make me step back and avoid it's use.</font>
><blockquote TYPE=CITE><i>.As we should with composites too. Any fear about
>aromatic ring</i>
><br><i>compounds leaking out of methacrylate? That stuff is soft! You have</i>
><br><i>some fancy terms for it, but it is really methacrylate.</i></blockquote>
><font face="Garamond">According to research conducted by some of America's
>most distinguished names in the field of dental research and operative
>dentistry, monomer is converted to polymer when it is light cured in the
>mouth for a directly placed composite. The conversion is in the range of
>60%, leaving 40% of unreacted monomer free within the restorative material.
>However, there are a number of options that can be employed to avoid this.
>One is the postcure polymerization, which consists of a final light cure
>of 60 seconds applied to each surface (facial or buccal, lingual and occlusal)
>to convert more monomer to polymer. Another way to convert more monomer
>to polymer is to add the composite in very small increments (no more than
>1 mm at a time) so that the curing light can reach the entire bulk of the
>added increment. I personally use a technique that has worked for me for
>many years and still affords great results. I first place a flowable type
>of composite to make sure it adheres well to the cavity walls than I cure
>this first increment of flowable resin. After that I place the composite
>in very small increments to make sure they are cured properly. Just to
>add to the routine, I use 4<sup>th</sup> or 5<sup>th</sup> generation dentine
>bonding agents, cavity cleansing solutions composed of 2% chlorhexidine
>gluconate (i.e. BISCO's cavity cleanser), I wash out the acid etchant with
>either peridex or pure distilled water to make sure the cavity (dentine)
>is not contaminated by bacteria introduced by tap water. After that I follow
>the recommendations of Dr. Karl Leinfelder on a research he published several
>years ago (in case you are interested, let me know and I will send you
>the reference) on the effect of surface sealant for composite restorations.
>I use either Fortify (my favorite) or Optiguard around the composite restorations
>to seal any marginal gap that might have been left after the finishing
>and polishing of the restoration. According to Dr. Leinfelder, the application
>of a surface sealant to a composite restoration every two years can greatly
>extend the longevity of a composite restoration. I have all my patients
>on a recall program and they come back to my office every two years for
>a regular check-up and at the same time for the application of another
>coat of surface sealant on their composite restorations. The oldest
>composite restorations were placed eight years ago and still look as if
>they were placed yesterday.</font><font face="Garamond"></font>
><p><font face="Garamond">Best Regards,</font><font face="Garamond"></font>
><p><font face="Garamond">Joe Chamberlain.</font>
><blockquote TYPE=CITE>
><p>> Joe Chamberlain
><p>>"Dr. Hal Dawl" wrote:
><p>>> DivaLove <pua...@flex.com> wrote in message
><br>>> <a href="news:381a05ef@coconut-wireless">news:381a05ef@coconut-wireless</a>...
><br>>> > Sheeze!! Of Course NOT! I advocate the removal of ALL Mercury/Amalgam
><br>>> > fillings.
><br>>>
><br>>> I have a story. I took over my practice from a dentist who
>is now in his
><br>>> 80s. He placed a lot of amalgam restorations in his time and
>did thousands
><br>>> the old fashioned way: squeezing the excess mercury out by
>hand. He is in
><br>>> very good health.
><br>>>
><br>>> I retained a good number of his patients and still have a number
>(or their
><br>>> progeny). Many of them are in their 80s and 90s and are relatively
>healthy.
><br>>> Some have of the usual diseases of old age.
><br>>>
><br>>> Well, a long time ago, many of these people had uncomfortable teeth.
>My
><br>>> predecessor took care of the real bad ones by removing them and
>replacing
><br>>> them with artificial teeth. However, most of the teeth with
>cavities were
><br>>> successfully treated with amalgam restorations and many are still
>extant and
><br>>> serviceable. Because of his skill and good service, these
>people (and there
><br>>> are plenty of them) have enjoy a lifetime of using their own teeth
>without
><br>>> discomfort and with minimal esthetic harm (usually only a problem
>when they
><br>>> yawn, which they do a lot of nowadays, given their age).
><br>>>
><br>>> I still place amalgam restorations because they are good, safe,
><br>>>
><br>>> I still think the best restoration is no restoration: preventing
>tooth
><br>>> decay and gum disease should be the focus of dentists, hygienists,
>and
><br>>> patients. However, will still be tooth decay for some time
>and most of
><br>>> those teeth will be restored to health by amalgam restorations for
>some
><br>>> time.
><br>>>
><br>>> For every anecdote about ill-effects from amalgams, there are millions
>and
><br>>> millions of people with no ill-effects who have enjoyed years of
>good
><br>>> service and comfortable teeth. Those comfortable choppers
>will help them
><br>>> live longer because they will be able to eat better. They
>will live into
><br>>> their 80s, 90s, and 100s and will be grateful that their dentists
>did a good
><br>>> job without harming them.
><br>>>
><br>>> Something to think about, no?
><p>>--------------27D6D7F5A0A307E3A6FF8C32
><br>>Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
><br>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
><p>><!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
><br>><html>
><br>>&nbsp;<font face="Garamond">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
>I can't
><br>>tell how many times I have read arguments for the reasons why dentists
><br>>prefer to use amalgam over composite. But I find it to be absolutely
>ridiculous
><br>>to transfer to the patients one's lack of professional talent or aptitude.
><br>>Knowing how who to do composite restorations right (i.e. using rubber
>dam
><br>>isolation) is the obligation of every dentist who keeps his office
>doors
><br>>opened. IT IS NOT AN OPTION !</font>
><br>><br><font face="Garamond">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
>Every
><br>>material has its inherent characteristics and they must be observed.
>Just
><br>>as with wisdom teeth removal, implant placement and so many other
>procedures
><br>>we perform routinely, composites also have a protocol that must be
>followed
><br>>for their placement. We don't stop placing implants because we think
>it
><br>>is too time consuming to place them. We don't stop removing third
>molars
><br>>because we think it is too troublesome. So why should we stop placing
>composite
><br>>restorations, and use amalgam instead ?</font>
><br>><br><font face="Garamond">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
>I
><br>>am tired of reading these same discussions time and time again. I
>have
><br>>placed several posts proving that composites are not much more expensive
><br>>than&nbsp; amalgam. They require the adherence to a strict protocol
>for
><br>>their placement. But I have been doing it for a number of years and
>I can
><br>>say that by now I am so much used to rubber dam isolation and the
>routine
><br>>for composite placement that it takes me just about the same amount
>of
><br>>time it takes to make an amalgam restoration.</font>
><br>><br><font face="Garamond">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
>Composites
><br>>are not considered to be a esthetic material anymore. They are currently
><br>>considered to be as resistant to abrasion as amalgam restorations
>(or very
><br>>close to! - close enough to be used safely in posterior teeth!). Some
>researchers
><br>>in the U.S. say that the combination of composites and the hybridization
><br>>of dentine through the use of a 4<sup>th</sup> or 5<sup>th</sup>
>generation
><br>>dental adhesives (such as Bisco's All Bond 2 or One Step) can strengthen
><br>>the tooth structure and make it as strong as it was before it was
>destroyed
><br>>by caries (tooth decay).&nbsp; Amalgam can't do that! In theory
>it can
><br>>be bonded to the tooth structure, but most dentists who refuse to
>do composites
><br>>because they are more time consuming and require more expertise, don't
><br>>take the time to bond amalgam restorations to the tooth structure.
>Then
><br>>it works as a wedge! I believe most of you realize that (or at least
>should!).</font>
><br>><br><font face="Garamond">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
>So
><br>>why shouldn't we place composites in place of amalgams regularly ?</font>
><br>><br><font face="Garamond">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
>I
><br>>will tell you what I think the reason is: CONVENIENCE !</font>
><br>><br><font face="Garamond">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
>It's
><br>>time to change. Even if there is no <u>apparent</u> reason at
>this time
><br>>to switch from amalgam to composites, the sole argument that there
>has
><br>>been a great deal of controversy surrounding the toxicity of amalgam
>should
><br>>be enough to prompt a change in behavior. We all should proceed with
>caution
><br>>until we have more proofs that amalgam is indeed risk free and safe.
>We
><br>>do have another viable alternative: Composites.</font>
><br>><br><font face="Garamond">&nbsp;</font>
><br>><br><font face="Garamond">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
>Joe
><br>>Chamberlain</font>
><br>><p>"Dr. Hal Dawl" wrote:
><br>><blockquote TYPE=CITE>DivaLove &lt;pua...@flex.com> wrote
>in message
><br>><br><a href="<a href="news:381a05ef@coconut-wireless">news:381a05ef@coconut-wireless</a>"><a href="news:381a05ef@coconut-wireless">news:381a05ef@coconut-wireless</a></a>...
><br>><br>> Sheeze!! Of Course NOT! I advocate the removal of ALL Mercury/Amalgam
><br>><br>> fillings.
><br>><p>I have a story.&nbsp; I took over my practice from a dentist
>who is
><br>>now in his
><br>><br>80s.&nbsp; He placed a lot of amalgam restorations in his
>time and
><br>>did thousands
><br>><br>the old fashioned way:&nbsp; squeezing the excess mercury
>out by hand.&nbsp;
><br>>He is in
><br>><br>very good health.
><br>><p>I retained a good number of his patients and still have a number
>(or
><br>>their
><br>><br>progeny).&nbsp; Many of them are in their 80s and 90s and
>are relatively
><br>>healthy.
><br>><br>Some have of the usual diseases of old age.
><br>><p>Well, a long time ago, many of these people had uncomfortable
>teeth.&nbsp;
><br>>My
><br>><br>predecessor took care of the real bad ones by removing them
>and replacing
><br>><br>them with artificial teeth.&nbsp; However, most of the
>teeth with cavities
><br>>were
><br>><br>successfully treated with amalgam restorations and many are
>still extant
><br>>and
><br>><br>serviceable.&nbsp; Because of his skill and good service,
>these people
><br>>(and there
><br>><br>are plenty of them) have enjoy a lifetime of using their own
>teeth
><br>>without
><br>><br>discomfort and with minimal esthetic harm (usually only a problem
>when
><br>>they
><br>><br>yawn, which they do a lot of nowadays, given their age).
><br>><p>I still place amalgam restorations because they are good, safe,
>and
><br>>cheap.
><br>><br>I do a lot of the fancier tooth-colored fillings, but that's
>only because
><br>><br>the materials that are becoming available are getting much
>better.&nbsp;
><br>>However,
><br>><br>there is still a problem.&nbsp; They are over used and
>many dentists
><br>>can't do
><br>><br>them right.&nbsp; They are difficult to do and if you don't
>do them
><br>>with strict
><br>><br>isolation and painstaking attention to technique, they don't
>last very
><br>>long
><br>><br>at all.&nbsp; So I get new patients all the time who I
>happily do root
><br>>canals and
><br>><br>crowns (big stuff) because the tooth-colored materials are
>so-so for
><br>>general
><br>><br>use by general dentists.&nbsp; Some dentists do a fine
>job putting
><br>>them in, but,
><br>><br>in my not so humble opinion, a lot of them don't.&nbsp;
>I think this
><br>>will change.
><br>><br>I think the public will benefit from newer, more durable materials
><br>>and
><br>><br>dentists who do a better job putting them in (or maybe putting
>them
><br>>in will
><br>><br>get a whole lot easier).&nbsp; Then we will have other
>toxins to worry
><br>>about, but
><br>><br>that's another story.
><br>><p>I still think the best restoration is no restoration:&nbsp;
>preventing
><br>>tooth
><br>><br>decay and gum disease should be the focus of dentists, hygienists,
><br>>and
><br>><br>patients.&nbsp; However, will still be tooth decay for
>some time and
><br>>most of
><br>><br>those teeth will be restored to health by amalgam restorations
>for
><br>>some
><br>><br>time.
><br>><p>For every anecdote about ill-effects from amalgams, there are
>millions
><br>>and
><br>><br>millions of people with no ill-effects who have enjoyed years
>of good
><br>><br>service and comfortable teeth.&nbsp; Those comfortable
>choppers will
><br>>help them
><br>><br>live longer because they will be able to eat better.&nbsp;
>They will
><br>>live into
><br>><br>their 80s, 90s, and 100s and will be grateful that their dentists
>did
><br>>a good
><br>><br>job without harming them.
><br>><p>Something to think about, no?</blockquote>
><br>></html>
><p>>--------------27D6D7F5A0A307E3A6FF8C32--</blockquote>
></html>
>--------------01BA468F9DC0BD245C52774F--
Joel M. Eichen
>Chamberlain <chamb...@cruiser.com.br> wrote:
>>The fact that a composite "MODBL" will not work out has
>>got nothing to do with economics. And nothing to do with dentistry either ! Composites are
>>just about as well suited for a crown as amalgam is.
We will always need crown technology as retainers or as anchors
(abutments) for bridgework.
However, the above statement suggests that a master of composites can
be amalgam-free and restore any tooth with that material. This would
suggest that the office performs NO single crowns.
I have yet to see the office thast follows this. It sounds good on
paper (and in newsgroups) but is practically speaking non-existent.
Can an office manage using amalgam and NEVER prescribing crowns? Yes.
There are lots of those offices.
The dentists might still be crown-happy, but unfortunately the
patients are not! And yes, this is economics.
Cheers,
Joel
----
Hans Lennros
Far as I know, every dentist is highly skilled with composites andIf not so, why are most dentists so reluctant in replacing amalgam by composite ? If you think about it, the arguments are always the same: composites are more time consuming; composites are trickier; composites are more technique sensitive; composites are "a lot" more expensive (when we know they are not so);
rubber dam. You cannot be implying that this is like brain surgery,
can you?
Because a MODBL amalgam will work for many years.First, if it is an MODBL than it is not an inlay; It is a crown. Second, a crown can not be used; a crown "must" be used. The fact that a composite "MODBL" will not work out has got nothing to do with economics. And nothing to do with dentistry either ! Composites are just about as well suited for a crown as amalgam is. In fact, there several different laboratory processed composite-type indirect restorative resins that could be used as a crown, as long as the conditions and circumstances allowed. If amalgam was that good, don't you think it would've been used as such by now ? The material is simply not strong enough. It is not indicated for such procedures. I can do a directly placed composite restoration for the same U$ 50 or U$ 60 you charge for amalgam.A MODBL inlay will work for many years. A crown can also be used. A
MODBL composite often will not work out! Its economics. We have lots
of people who extract teeth because Mr. Cosmetics Dentist told the
patient it might cost $1,500 to fix the tooth. An amalgam for $50 or
$60 will often stay there for many years.
ANSWER: Stop opening posts that begin with, "I like amalgam because .I can't help it ! It is right there in front of me and it is wrong !
."
Joe. How many crowns do you insert in a year? By your reconing, it
should be zero. I will bet it is more.
.As we should with composites too. Any fear about aromatic ringAccording to research conducted by some of America's most distinguished names in the field of dental research and operative dentistry, monomer is converted to polymer when it is light cured in the mouth for a directly placed composite. The conversion is in the range of 60%, leaving 40% of unreacted monomer free within the restorative material. However, there are a number of options that can be employed to avoid this. One is the postcure polymerization, which consists of a final light cure of 60 seconds applied to each surface (facial or buccal, lingual and occlusal) to convert more monomer to polymer. Another way to convert more monomer to polymer is to add the composite in very small increments (no more than 1 mm at a time) so that the curing light can reach the entire bulk of the added increment. I personally use a technique that has worked for me for many years and still affords great results. I first place a flowable type of composite to make sure it adheres well to the cavity walls than I cure this first increment of flowable resin. After that I place the composite in very small increments to make sure they are cured properly. Just to add to the routine, I use 4th or 5th generation dentine bonding agents, cavity cleansing solutions composed of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (i.e. BISCO's cavity cleanser), I wash out the acid etchant with either peridex or pure distilled water to make sure the cavity (dentine) is not contaminated by bacteria introduced by tap water. After that I follow the recommendations of Dr. Karl Leinfelder on a research he published several years ago (in case you are interested, let me know and I will send you the reference) on the effect of surface sealant for composite restorations. I use either Fortify (my favorite) or Optiguard around the composite restorations to seal any marginal gap that might have been left after the finishing and polishing of the restoration. According to Dr. Leinfelder, the application of a surface sealant to a composite restoration every two years can greatly extend the longevity of a composite restoration. I have all my patients on a recall program and they come back to my office every two years for a regular check-up and at the same time for the application of another coat of surface sealant on their composite restorations. The oldest composite restorations were placed eight years ago and still look as if they were placed yesterday.
compounds leaking out of methacrylate? That stuff is soft! You have
some fancy terms for it, but it is really methacrylate.
Best Regards,
Joe Chamberlain.
--
Chamberlain
It is too bad you still don't get the point. Put a crown where a crown belongs; put composite
where composite belongs. Composites and amalgam are not meant to be used as crowns. Now, if you
had to choose between the two, composite would be a more logical alternative. I am not the one
saying that. The world of dental research is. Take a look at Vita Zeta, Ivoclar Targis-Vectris,
Belle de St. Clair BelleGlass HP, Kerr Herculite XRV Lab and so many other indirect
laboratory-processed composite-type restorative materials. They can be used for crowns as long
as certain conditions are met. They are not indicated for molars (in my understanding, although
a number of distinguished names think can be used for this application).
Now this has nothing to do with economics. I place lots of individual crowns. Guess where I
place this crowns: where composites and amalgam are NOT INDICATED !
Where a directly placed restorative material is indicated I use composite. When the tooth
structure is destroyed to the point the a directly placed restorative material is not indicated,
I go for an individual crown. I simply don't use amalgam to make it simpler for me and the
patient. I do what is right ! Period ! And to prove that it's got nothing to do economics I
charge the same for amalgam (which I don't do anymore) and composite.
One thing I will not do: place a "amalgam" crown on a tooth. It doesn't matter how much the
"average Joe-six-pack" (to use your own description) earns in a year. It doesn't matter what the
insurance company says. I will do what is right and scientifically proven. And current
scientific knowledge says that amalgam is not strong enough to be used as a crown.
All dentists should be well trained in composite placement. However, what we see is that most
refuse to give up amalgam just because it is CONVENIENT for them. It is a lot easier to do
amalgam. And amalgam affords greater profits.
I am not defending composite or taking a position in favor of the anti-amalgamists. If the
situation was the other way around, I would be avoiding composite. I think amalgam as a
restorative material, as I mentioned before, has great merits. If it was not in the spotlight
for being a health hazard, I would still use in some situations.
It is only a matter of common sense. Which of the two is more controversial at the moment ?
Which of the two, according to current scientific evidence, "COULD" be a potential health hazard
? Then, which of the two should be avoided ?
Got it ?
Best Regards,
Joe Chamberlain.
"Joel M. Eichen" wrote:
> jo...@earthlink.net (Joel M. Eichen) wrote:
>
> >Chamberlain <chamb...@cruiser.com.br> wrote:
>
> >>The fact that a composite "MODBL" will not work out has
> >>got nothing to do with economics. And nothing to do with dentistry either ! Composites are
> >>just about as well suited for a crown as amalgam is.
>
Joel M. Eichen
>Det här är ett multipart-meddelande i MIME-format.
>------=_NextPart_000_025B_01BF2562.C41079A0
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>Hi Chamberlain,=20
>=20
>I wonder what the Public thinks of all this talk. Are teeht different?=20
>Or are dentists?=20
>=20
>Hans
Dentists are different with differing skills. The public needs to know
this.
Doing a composite is not a good judge of high skill quality. There are
many, many more challenging aspects to dentistry. After all, drilling
the tooth is drilling the tooth. Learning about which bottle to use,
is found in almost any up-to-date journal or tecnic sheet.
Joel M. Eichen
>Hi Joel:
>It is too bad you still don't get the point.
I get it. Convince folks that amalgam is no good means that there's
plenty more crowns to do. Crowns and extractions that is!
>Put a crown where a crown belongs; put composite
>where composite belongs. Composites and amalgam are not meant to be used as crowns. Now, if you
>had to choose between the two, composite would be a more logical alternative. I am not the one
>saying that. The world of dental research is. Take a look at Vita Zeta, Ivoclar Targis-Vectris,
>Belle de St. Clair BelleGlass HP,
$$$$$$$$
>Kerr Herculite XRV Lab and so many other indirect
>laboratory-processed composite-type restorative materials. They can be used for crowns as long
>as certain conditions are met. They are not indicated for molars (in my understanding, although
>a number of distinguished names think can be used for this application).
>Now this has nothing to do with economics. I place lots of individual crowns.
See above!
>Guess where I
>place this crowns: where composites and amalgam are NOT INDICATED !
>Where a directly placed restorative material is indicated I use composite. When the tooth
>structure is destroyed to the point the a directly placed restorative material is not indicated,
>I go for an individual crown. I simply don't use amalgam to make it simpler for me and the
>patient. I do what is right ! Period ! And to prove that it's got nothing to do economics I
>charge the same for amalgam (which I don't do anymore)
I charge even less for implants (which I do not do anymore either).
>and composite.
>One thing I will not do: place a "amalgam" crown on a tooth. It doesn't matter how much the
>"average Joe-six-pack" (to use your own description) earns in a year. It doesn't matter what the
>insurance company says. I will do what is right and scientifically proven. And current
>scientific knowledge says that amalgam is not strong enough to be used as a crown.
I see dozens of these teeth which have been in service for 20 years,
30 years, and more. In other words, its an illusion. The filling
really is not there?
>
>All dentists should be well trained in composite placement. However, what we see is that most
>refuse to give up amalgam just because it is CONVENIENT for them. It is a lot easier to do
>amalgam. And amalgam affords greater profits.
Really? I heard that dentists subsidize amalgam fees. How come
cosmetic dentists make so much more than regular old neighborhood
guys? If what you say is correct, the reverse should be true. I hear
up to $1,000,000 a year for cosmetic practices!
>I am not defending composite or taking a position in favor of the anti-amalgamists.
Really?
> If the
>situation was the other way around, I would be avoiding composite. I think amalgam as a
>restorative material, as I mentioned before, has great merits. If it was not in the spotlight
>for being a health hazard,
Better get informed. This is incorrect.
>I would still use in some situations.
>It is only a matter of common sense. Which of the two is more controversial at the moment ?
>Which of the two, according to current scientific evidence, "COULD" be a potential health hazard
>?
Either one!
>Then, which of the two should be avoided ?
>Got it ?
>Best Regards,
>Joe Chamberlain.
>"Joel M. Eichen" wrote:
>> jo...@earthlink.net (Joel M. Eichen) wrote:
>>
>> >Chamberlain <chamb...@cruiser.com.br> wrote:
>>
>> >>The fact that a composite "MODBL" will not work out has
>> >>got nothing to do with economics. And nothing to do with dentistry either ! Composites are
>> >>just about as well suited for a crown as amalgam is.
>>