Getting me teeth fixed.

theheathen

welshdent wrote: »

re partials\

In your opinion it may be but you do not speak for everyone. Some people are simply not suitable for anything more for various reasons. May be poor quality abutment teeth, poor oral hygiene, sinus or other anatomical issues. You can not simply say a partial is " horrendous bargain basement way to restore a missing tooth/teeth" because it simply isnt true. I was looking at a lab guide today from a dental magazine and their charges are £472 for a particular type of denture. Thats hardly bargain basement. I see you have ignored my "anecdote" because it doesnt suit your arguement. Dont gloss over it by making an incorrect assumption. You are implying we would all take the teeth out. I havent so why ignore me? What about the patient I am seeing who I have sectioned the mesiobucal root from an UL6 and root filled it whilst also root filling the remnants of UR7 along with extraction of UL1 and addition to partial all on a band 2. All so that I can prevent further tooth loss and thus make his good denture remain good during his bone healing. If we are all just whipping teeth out left right and centre why am I doing this? This patient can not have a bridge as he doesnt have enough teeth and he doesnt want implants.

Why should a bridge fail? Well you again have ignored all the reasons I gave and NONE of them apply to mechanics but all are very common reasons for failure. There is no need to be facetious regarding materials and cements. None of the bridges I have seen fail, have failed because of a crap material. Sure sometimes the porcelain breaks but that is NOT due to bad materials. It may be due to long term bond fatigue, catching the "tooth" on an unexpected hard lump in some food etc. FWIW I have never been tempted to use blancmange to cement crowns. Perhaps if you ate less of it your teeth would last longer.

Dentures, be they partial or full are fine so long as you don't intend on doing much chewing. Then you have bone loss which might preclude subsequent implant placement, or necessitate grafting procedures. I've seen quite a few long span bridges (some full arch) and as long as the coping is metallic they generally last a long time.

welshdent

theheathen wrote: »

As for dental training, this is going to come as quite the cataclysm to you, but it is possible to acquire and assimilate knowledge outside of a formal educational environment.

I do not doubt it for a second but WADR you havent done it very well by the look of things.

Your comments on bridge failure typifies that. A phrase I picked up from playing rugby ... all the gear no idea. You have accumulated information and you are clearly passionate and well read on the subject but what you appear to be lacking is the understanding of said knowledge. The ability to piece all those pieces together to be something more meaningful. Your ideas re 28 crown preps again highlight this. Not one dentist on here has said it would be a good idea. The only person to directly comment on it has said it would be a bad idea for the reasons the stated. The knowledge that it is possible to be done, is no substitute for the understanding of why it shouldn't.

theheathen

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

Call me old-fashioned, but before anyone other than DH gets anywhere near my mouth they'd better have some formal dental training behind them.

I'm don't recall where I offered my services as a dental practitioner to the public.

welshdent

theheathen wrote: »

Dentures, be they partial or full are fine so long as you don't intend on doing much chewing. Then you have bone loss which might preclude subsequent implant placement, or necessitate grafting procedures. I've seen quite a few long span bridges (some full arch) and as long as the coping is metallic they generally last a long time.

All this from an informal environment eh??

You are again basing judgements on your own standards. A dangerous thing to do. You are again ignoring biological reasons for failure. You can make the coping out of whatever you like. If the abutment teeth break, become non vital, decay, develop perio disease ... it still fails.

I have a lot of patients that simply do not want implants ... and are happy with their dentures. Are you telling me they are wrong for being happy?

theheathen

welshdent wrote: »

I do not doubt it for a second but WADR you havent done it very well.

Your comments on bridge failure typifies that. A phrase I picked up from playing rugby ... all the gear no idea. You have accumulated information and you are clearly passionate and well read on the subject but what you are lacking is the understanding of said knowledge. The ability to piece all those pieces together to be something more meaningful. Your ideas re 28 crown preps again highlight this. Not one dentist on here has said it would be a good idea. The only person to directly comment on it has said it would be a bad idea for the reasons the stated. The knowledge that it is possible to be done, is no substitute for the understanding of why it shouldn't.

I do so tire of these obscure acronyms. What one person saves in typing time, the other loses in discovering what it stands for. Regarding crown preps 2 dentist I have visited IRL (what's good for the goose) did suggest crowns for posterior teeth, and veneers as a more conservative treatment on the anterior. Given there is significant cervical erosion on quite a number of teeth the proposal did not seem unreasonable, the accordant fee did.

welshdent

I am referring to the dentists on here. You are expecting me to a) take your word for the proposed plan and b) take your word for it having not seen you at all. I also do not know what you said to those dentists with regards to what you have asked them to provide you. Given your previous posts you will forgive me for me scepticism.

(WADR - with all due respect. IRL - In real life (I knew that one so no time lost ta))

theheathen

welshdent wrote: »

All this from an informal environment eh??

You are again basing judgements on your own standards. A dangerous thing to do. You are again ignoring biological reasons for failure. You can make the coping out of whatever you like. If the abutment teeth break, become non vital, decay, develop perio disease ... it still fails.

I have a lot of patients that simply do not want implants ... and are happy with their dentures. Are you telling me they are wrong for being happy?

Sure, but that isn't an intrinsic failure of the bridge. If a crowned tooth falls out due to periodontal disease that isn't the fault of the crown. You can't blame subsequent pathology on a restoration that did what it was intended to.

Wrong for being happy? Never. Indeed, I dare say a removable dentition could well contribute to greater matrimonial contentment.

theheathen

welshdent wrote: »

I am referring to the dentists on here. You are expecting me to a) take your word for the proposed plan and b) take your word for it having not seen you at all. I also do not know what you said to those dentists with regards to what you have asked them to provide you. Given your previous posts you will forgive me for me scepticism.

(WADR - with all due respect. IRL - In real life (I knew that one so no time lost ta))

I not only forgive it, I would encourage it.

welshdent

I wasnt aware we were discussing intrinsic failure. As far as i am concerned we are talking failure full stop. You can not pick and choose what constitutes failure. To the patient the result is still the same.

theheathen

welshdent wrote: »

I wasnt aware we were discussing intrinsic failure. As far as i am concerned we are talking failure full stop. You can not pick and choose what constitutes failure. To the patient the result is still the same.

!!!! happens.

Someone might get their teeth veneered, and get them knocked out by a cricket bat the following week.