Advice on Teeth Whitening Discussion Thread

brook2jack

What is interesting is the EU has made law that only dentists can use hydrogen peroxide between 0.1% and 6% for tooth whitening.

The EU is bringing in legislation to ban sodium perborate which is a toxic substance used by illegal whiteners to whiten teeth .

In this legislation the EU is following Japan, Canada, Australia , New Zealand and many other countries in curtailing and banning illegal whiteners.

Unfortunately the illegal whiteners are now claiming it's unfair competition and trying that route to continue their dangerous and unregulated activities.

Beauticians organisations have reported hundreds of civil cases against beauticians , and virtually every dentist has seen permanent damage done by illegal whitening, including people damaged by seemingly peroxide free systems.

Fortunately the legal tide with multiple prosecutions appears to be entirely against illegal whiteners.

To quote quote from the court report "In GDC v Lorna Jamous, the High Court has just held that tooth-whitening is a treatment that is "usually" performed by dentists and therefore cannot lawfully be carried out by unqualified people. The court overturned the earlier ruling of a magistrate after considering evidence from GDC witnesses who spoke of the danger and complications of such treatment. The High Court ruled that the public had to be protected from treatment by those not qualified to give it, and held that the defendant, a "beautician", should be convicted of contravening the Act. The maximum sentence if convicted at the Magistrate Court is either a fine of £5000 or 6 months imprisonment."

Teethwhiteninguk

brook2jack wrote: »

What is interesting is the EU has made law that only dentists can use hydrogen peroxide between 0.1% and 6% for tooth whitening.

The EU is bringing in legislation to ban sodium perborate which is a toxic substance used by illegal whiteners to whiten teeth .

In this legislation the EU is following Japan, Canada, Australia , New Zealand and many other countries in curtailing and banning illegal whiteners.

Unfortunately the illegal whiteners are now claiming it's unfair competition and trying that route to continue their dangerous and unregulated activities.

Beauticians organisations have reported hundreds of civil cases against beauticians , and virtually every dentist has seen permanent damage done by illegal whitening, including people damaged by seemingly peroxide free systems.

Fortunately the legal tide with multiple prosecutions appears to be entirely against illegal whiteners.

To quote quote from the court report "In GDC v Lorna Jamous, the High Court has just held that tooth-whitening is a treatment that is "usually" performed by dentists and therefore cannot lawfully be carried out by unqualified people. The court overturned the earlier ruling of a magistrate after considering evidence from GDC witnesses who spoke of the danger and complications of such treatment. The High Court ruled that the public had to be protected from treatment by those not qualified to give it, and held that the defendant, a "beautician", should be convicted of contravening the Act. The maximum sentence if convicted at the Magistrate Court is either a fine of £5000 or 6 months imprisonment."

There you again, Lorna was not using illegal or unsafe products. It is the same as stating all dentists are operating illegally because some of them use illegal products.

She is appealing and has not been given sentence while the process continues.

brook2jack

She was convicted on carrying out illegal practice of dentistry. The court ruled the public had to be protected from treatment by those unqualified to give it.

They ruled she does not have the qualifications, knowledge or training to recognise what oral conditions someone might have and how to differentiate between a healthy mouth and an unhealthy one. Any chemical which changes the colour of teeth , the hardest substance in the body, has the potential to cause great damage to the tissues of the mouth. You only have to look at pictures and read illegal whiteners websites to see photos of clearly damaged mouths and dangerous practices.

Teethwhiteninguk

brook2jack wrote: »

She was convicted on carrying out illegal practice of dentistry. The court ruled the public had to be protected from treatment by those unqualified to give it.

They ruled she does not have the qualifications, knowledge or training to recognise what oral conditions someone might have and how to differentiate between a healthy mouth and an unhealthy one. Any chemical which changes the colour of teeth , the hardest substance in the body, has the potential to cause great damage to the tissues of the mouth. You only have to look at pictures and read illegal whiteners websites to see photos of clearly damaged mouths and dangerous practices.

You are not telling me anything that I do not already know. I do not condone malpractice by anyone.

If she is appealing, her barrister obviously disagrees. This is a very expensive process for someone with little money.

I presume the chemists will be removing all their teeth whitening products from the shelves now?

Your account does not mirror the GDC's or the specific legislation applied.

brook2jack

When a member of the public goes to have someone whiten their teeth they have a reasonable expectation that that process will be safe for them.

When they read a qualified "whitening technician" will be supervising the treatment they do not realise the qualification is a useless bit of paper gained by listening to a glorified sales person for a couple of hours.

They may fill out a questionnaire , be questioned by the illegal whitener and are then shocked and disgusted when they realise the whitener is no more qualified than a lorry driver to do whitening and the treatment ends up causing pain and damage.

Search on this site and you will find multiple instances of people who were damaged by seemingly sodium bicarbonate systems which they were told would cause no pain. You will find many people who booked whitening through groupon etc shocked when they turned up not to a dentists but a beauty salon.
A survey has shown over 80% of the British public think dentists only should whiten and 75% think non dentists should be prosecuted.

Teethwhiteninguk

brook2jack wrote: »

When a member of the public goes to have someone whiten their teeth they have a reasonable expectation that that process will be safe for them.

When they read a qualified "whitening technician" will be supervising the treatment they do not realise the qualification is a useless bit of paper gained by listening to a glorified sales person for a couple of hours.

They may fill out a questionnaire , be questioned by the illegal whitener and are then shocked and disgusted when they realise the whitener is no more qualified than a lorry driver to do whitening and the treatment ends up causing pain and damage.

Search on this site and you will find multiple instances of people who were damaged by seemingly sodium bicarbonate systems which they were told would cause no pain. You will find many people who booked whitening through groupon etc shocked when they turned up not to a dentists but a beauty salon.
A survey has shown over 80% of the British public think dentists only should whiten and 75% think non dentists should be prosecuted.

The public has a greater expectation that Dentists will comply with the law and the majority of dentists who decided to cash in on the teeth whitening bonanza broke the cosmetic regulations legislation over many years and made a lot of money doing so.

No one was harmed in the Jamous case. Section 37 for the Dentist Act was not used, so she was not practicing dentistry but she innocently used a term that gave the impression she was dentally qualified 'Dental Bleaching Technician'.

No training or supervision is needed for safe legal products. This is the law.

Those who break or have broken the cosmetic regulations including 1000's of dentist should be prosecuted, including the companies supplying the products to dentists.

Dentists even now admit to buying illegal products in brown paper bags so that can continue to use power whitening or boast on their website because they are a dentist they can do so.

Search of the internet provides evidence of 1000's of patients harmed by illegal products used by dentists including some people I know. Many only received the product training from a salesman or no training at all.

I note my dental practice is now displaying they have had the appropriate training to meet GDC guide llines, but this was not previously the case.

In addition, after 11 years my dentist decided to give me an X-Ray and found bone loss. I am assuming this is due to the Which reports, that were very damming about the cursory examinations carried out by dentists on their patients and who pay a great deal of money to a dental surgeon to do their job properly and to behave with integrity.

Can the public trust dentists to whiten their teeth with dangerous peroxides if it has been proven some are not to be trusted to carry out a simple examination properly or thoroughly. How do the innocent public know?

The government created a lot of confusion and in the BABTAC report they apologised. The minister even wrote that 6% peroxide was safe to use unsupervised by the public. In the states people can buy 6% peroxide in Walmart and there is no age restriction. The same applies in Australia.

There has only been 2 reported cases worldwide as far as I am aware about damage to people using home products deemed safe for the public to buy.

Teethwhiteninguk

If I can add, that I do not blame the dentists and others for spouting their opinion as they are only conveying the GDC message.

However, some dentists under various guises have crossed the line and brought their profession in to disrepute via inappropriate postings. Perhaps the illegal teeth whitening brigade may get their just deserts in due course - we shall see. They may have good intentions, but in my view and those of others their behaviour is less than professional or honourable. If the police behaved in the same way there would be a public outcry.

I represent people who have been treated badly by various government authorities and I am aware how manipulative they can be at times.

brook2jack

I'm sorry but alot of what you have posted is highly inaacurate

Damage from home products...... which? reported over 60% of people buying home bleaching products suffered pain.http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2010/aug/20/illegal-tooth-whitening-online

In Australia the law has changed to limit the amount of hydrogen peroxide in take home kits and moves are afoot to completely ban them
http://bitemagazine.com.au/index.php/accc-takes-on-unsafe-teeth-whiteners/

In the US each individual state makes its own law in this regard and many have already restricted the concentration of hydrogen peroxide.

Home kits can and do damage teeth. Any dentist will have seen many people with damage http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1282977/DIY-dazzlers-High-Street-tooth-whiteners-test.html

It makes perfect sense to follow the NHS advice http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/dentalhealth/Pages/teeth-whitening.aspx

Finally a dentist spends years studying what is a healthy mouth and what is not. If you have proof they are breaking the law then report to the GDC. But remember as per previous posts in 2011 a few months after the law came into force trading standards issued a statement that they were happy for dentists only to use peroxide bleaching products.

Teethwhiteninguk

brook2jack wrote: »

I'm sorry but alot of what you have posted is highly inaacurate

Damage from home products...... which? reported over 60% of people buying home bleaching products suffered pain.http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2010/aug/20/illegal-tooth-whitening-online

In Australia the law has changed to limit the amount of hydrogen peroxide in take home kits and moves are afoot to completely ban them
http://bitemagazine.com.au/index.php/accc-takes-on-unsafe-teeth-whiteners/

In the US each individual state makes its own law in this regard and many have already restricted the concentration of hydrogen peroxide.

Home kits can and do damage teeth. Any dentist will have seen many people with damage http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1282977/DIY-dazzlers-High-Street-tooth-whiteners-test.html

It makes perfect sense to follow the NHS advice http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/dentalhealth/Pages/teeth-whitening.aspx

Finally a dentist spends years studying what is a healthy mouth and what is not. If you have proof they are breaking the law then report to the GDC. But remember as per previous posts in 2011 a few months after the law came into force trading standards issued a statement that they were happy for dentists only to use peroxide bleaching products.

Once again you are posting inaccuracies, have you actually read the Australian report properly?

“Consumers should be extremely cautious before undertaking any DIY teeth whitening treatment and should not use kits that contain more than 6 per cent hydrogen peroxide and/or more than 18 per cent carbamide peroxide.”

brook2jack

I and most dental professionals have not been led by the GDC.

Weekly we see the damage done by this fashionable fad.

Only recently I had to do a root treatment on an 18 year old with not a filling in her mouth who was bought whitening from a beautician as a Valentine's present from her boyfriend.

It made one tooth in particular so sensitive the nerve died. She is so embarrassed and doesn't want to upset her boyfriend she won't sue the beautician, even to protect others from the same harm.

Most dentists have seen this sort of damage and I believe the Facebook site was started by an encounter with an illegal whitener in a shop who offered to whiten someone's teeth when they had been told they were not suitable by a dentist. I turn down about 60% of people who want whitening as it would damage people's oral health.