Advice on Teeth Whitening Discussion Thread

Teethwhiteninguk

We shall wait and see.

What is a directive?
EU directives lay down certain end results that must be achieved in every Member State. National authorities have to adapt their laws to meet these goals, but are free to decide how to do so. Directives may concern one or more EU countries, or all of them. http://ec.europa.eu/eu_law/directives/directives_en.htm

You do not have to demonstrate a formal interest in bringing proceedings. Neither do you have to prove that you are principally and directly concerned by the infringement complained about. To be admissible, a complaint has to relate to an infringement of EU law by a Member State. It cannot therefore concern a private dispute.
http://ec.europa.eu/eu_law/your_rights/your_rights_en.htm

Freedom to provide services / Freedom of establishment

The principle of freedom of establishment enables an economic operator (whether a person or a company) to carry on an economic activity in a stable and continuous way in one or more Member States. The principle of the freedom to provide services enables an economic operator providing services in one Member State to offer services on a temporary basis in another Member State, without having to be established.

This means, in practice, that Member States must modify national laws that restrict freedom of establishment, or the freedom to provide services, and are therefore incompatible with these principles. Member States may only maintain such restrictions in specific circumstances where these are justified by overriding reasons of general interest, for instance on grounds of public policy, public security or public health; and where they are proportionate.

EU Verification of the Law
Confirmation has been provided in writing from the EU Commission that non-dental professionals are permitted to use products containing or releasing up to 0.1% peroxide without training or qualifications and there are no restrictions as to who can administer the cosmetic teeth whitening treatment. The new legislation also applies to other peroxide products for hair, skin and nails.

In accordance with the provisions of Directive 2011/84/UE, products whitening or bleaching teeth containing 0.1% or less of hydrogen peroxide present or released can be freely placed on the market and can be readily available to consumers. The Directive does not impose restrictions on the training of people who would use these products. Consumers themselves can apply these products, as well as dentists or others.

The Dental Act prohibits diagnosis and giving advice about someones teeth.

If it is illegal as you say, why are Trading Standards disagreeing with you and permitting people to trade after inspection.

Teethwhiteninguk

Corporate Cyber Harassment/Institutional Harassment

The National Centre for Cyber-stalking Research UK based at the University of Bedfordshire is undertaking a study in Corporate Cyber harassment. Their literature suggests this is increasing, it is commonly thought that cyber harassment and stalking problems are predominantly associated with school-age children and individuals. However, more and more people are engaging in cyber-harassment behaviours against organisations and businesses.

In some instances people consider such cyber harassment merely a casual annoyance, particularly when stemming from a critique or difference of opinion.

However, in other situations, people and companies are the targets of intentional malicious attacks, and the impacts from these attacks on individuals and businesses are real and significant, and reflect more malevolent motives.

The impact of such cyber-attacks on the targeted companies in some cases can cause highly negative effects. These can include:

1. Time and costs involved in minimising damage.
2. Negative impact on reputation.
3. Financial loss.
4. Prevention from conducting business.
5. Going out of business.
6. Psychological discomfort.

Companies should be able to operate freely within the EU without difficulty or harassment. No one would disagree that the disreputable operators in all industries need to be removed from the market place in a professional and appropriate way. There are bad dentists too and complaints are increasing; from the evidence provided some dentists are operating without indemnity insurance.

brook2jack

Has a single persecution of an illegal whitener failed yet?

Has a successful or even unsuccessful suit been carried out against the GDC by an illegal whitener?

The first prosecution was some years ago now and many illegal businesses have been closed down after contact from the GDC or prosecution.

Teethwhiteninguk

brook2jack wrote: »

There is a massive difference between what people can do in their own homes and what they think they are getting when they go to an illegal whiteners.

When they look at advertising which says certified,insured ,expert, professional whitening technician they think they are getting someone who has expert advice, skills and is regulated. Quite often they think they are being treated by a dental professional. They place their trust in someone who they think is very knowledgeable in the field.

What they get is , at best , someone who had done a few hours "training" with another illegal whitener. Their "qualification" is a piece of paper that is not nationally or regionally recognised and the only testing involved is their credit card balance to pay the fee for training.

The vast majority of illegal whiteners do not even know what is in the chemicals they apply to teeth or their concentrations.

This is a real concern if clients , in order to try to circumvent the law, are asked to put trays in their mouth to fabricate rough and ready whitening trays which are then filled with chemicals. Any tray made in this way will be very,very ill fitting. Whitening solution will contact the soft tissues of the gums and drip onto tongue , get swallowed etc. Remember this is a chemical that supposedly will whiten enamel , the hardest substance in the body. What can it potentially do in the mouth, or when swallowed? What will it do if there is any oral health problem ? The crux is an illegal whitener with a couple of hours "training" has no idea who should and shouldn't be treated.

I presume you have been in touch with the leading chemists about your concerns. My trays are very and soft and only worn for 15 minutes, unlike dental trays that have to be worn overnight and the peroxide slips down your throat. My friend had custom made trays by her dentist - she was not told the product was illegal (prior to 31/10/12) and the trays chafed her gums and the peroxide made her very sensitive.

One again, I have said the illegal operators need to be challenged, but nothing is going to happen here. If you know about these people report them.

I think the public have got the message. But not all operators are the same. I had a horrendous experience 4 years ago, so I know what you are referring to.

The legislation states the customer should know the ingredients being used to provide informed consent. The dentists consent forms did not advise their patients that they were being treated with illegal products or in some cases up to 25%HP.

The public need to know there are 2 sides. It is just so disappointing that the medical profession only representing one side of the picture. I prefer to see both points of view and then take the right steps to stop illegal behaviour.

Rants and complaints on here will not achieve the desired objective.

Teethwhiteninguk

brook2jack wrote: »

Has a single persecution of an illegal whitener failed yet?

Has a successful or even unsuccessful suit been carried out against the GDC by an illegal whitener?

The first prosecution was some years ago now and many illegal businesses have been closed down after contact from the GDC or prosecution.

True but many thousands have not. Trading standards are failing in their duty of care to the public if they allow illegal businesses to trade.

Many rogue companies have existed, because the training providers have been rogues (but not all of them). The problem needs to be tackled from the root cause.

brook2jack

You are mistaken , trading standards do not prosecute illegal whiteners the GDC do as illegal whiteners are carrying out dentistry.

Trading standards prosecute people using illegal substances, such as non dentists using hydrogen peroxide , or sodium perborate which basically breaks down to hydrogen peroxide..

You are also mistaken , whitening trays are not slept in overnight this practice has not been recommended for many years and the trays are made in a laboratory to a precise prescription so a minimal amount of chemical is used.

brook2jack

Teethwhiteninguk wrote: »

True but many thousands have not. Trading standards are failing in their duty of care to the public if they allow illegal businesses to trade.

Many rogue companies have existed, because the training providers have been rogues (but not all of them). The problem needs to be tackled from the root cause.

There is alot of deliberate misleading the public. Take this website http://www.sparklesmileshop.com/about it talks about dentally qualified bleaching technicians. A member of the public would take that to mean a dentist/hygienist etc when in fact it is a person who has been on a couple of hours "training".

It talks about products being approved by the GDC (general dental council) . The GDC has nothing to do with approving products and does not approve any.

It says it is registered with TAWP an organisation that has no powers, is run by people promoting a particular system and has a website that the public cannot even "report ""problems" on.

It sells products to bleach teeth but has no information on what is in them or concentration of chemicals.Except for one kit which has gels equivalent to 25% hydrogen peroxide and another which is o2 gel which is 6% carbamine peroxide!!!! Illegal, illegal.

Perhaps this is the sort of rogue outfit you are talking about.

Teethwhiteninguk

Is the gentleman who is providing laser teeth whitening misleading the public?

I spent 4 years studying Dental Technology and 8 years working as a Dental Technician. I am certainly not claiming to be a Dentist and I cannot perform any dental treatments. What I can do, is advise you confidently with my knowledge and extensive Dental experience.

GDC code of Practice:

Dental technicians do not provide treatment for or give advice to patients in the ways that are described under the sections for hygienists, therapists, orthodontic therapists or dentists.

I do not mislead the public, unlike some dentists I have stated a fact. I am also not prepared to state ALL teeth whitening treatments are illegal by non-dentist as this not a proven legal fact. Many Trading Standards seem to agree too. This is also a fact.

My friend was not informed her tooth whitening was illegal when it was delivered by her dentist before 31/10/2012. When I told her she was quite shocked. I am sure most members of the public would be too. Award winning dentists have confessed to this on the WWW. This is a fact.

Vigilantism is not popular in the UK and some people need to take care with what they say and do on the WWW.

Teethwhiteninguk

brook2jack wrote: »

You are mistaken , trading standards do not prosecute illegal whiteners the GDC do as illegal whiteners are carrying out dentistry.

Trading standards prosecute people using illegal substances, such as non dentists using hydrogen peroxide , or sodium perborate which basically breaks down to hydrogen peroxide..

You are also mistaken , whitening trays are not slept in overnight this practice has not been recommended for many years and the trays are made in a laboratory to a precise prescription so a minimal amount of chemical is used.

Trading Standards should know if a business is trading illegally and as the practice of teeth whitening is allegedly illegal by non dentists, this does not make sense.

Enlighten is a popular up market treatment that is delivered by dentists and worn overnight according to this review as well as my friend. It also claims to be sensitivity free treatment, but clearly it is not.

http://www.redonline.co.uk/beauty/treatment-reviews/enlighten-teeth-whitening

Teethwhiteninguk

brook2jack wrote: »

Actually the price may very well not be £48 for your friend. There are different schemes of fees for nhs treatment in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

£48 is the band two charge in England only, elsewhere different charges apply and depending on what exactly needs doing may be more or less than this figure.A root filling, filling and associated x rays for a molar tooth in Scotland on the NHS will come to around this amount so you could very well be advising them wrongly.

Also the NHS charge is for treatment necessary to secure dental health only . So if your friend wanted a filling replaced for cosmetic reasons, or a white filling instead of a silver one at the back then they will be charged a private fee as the nhs is not there to provide cosmetic treatment.

No, just a simple mercury fillling no xray etc.. My NHS dentist always quotes 2 prices private and NHS.