NHS Molar Root Canal

brook2jack

The "patron saint" of anti amalgam it's Hal Huggins was struck off for making false claims about the health benefits from removing amalgam fillings http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/mercury.html


I am old enough to remember when tons of health food shops had "experts" wielding vega machines which "proved" you were being poisoned by your fillings . These machines are now used to "prove" food intolerances with the same scientific vigour !!! http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/electro.html

There is a lot of money to be made from removing amalgam fillings for health grounds, however the evidence does not support this practice except for localised lichen planus. Indeed the multiple sclerosis society advised people against having their fillings replaced saying there was no evidence to support it.

brook2jack

izzybella16 wrote: »

Over 100 years ago I'm sure they had their reasons for using mercury. Today with the advances made in technology and composites mercury just isn't needed.

If you read my earlier response there are many clinical situations where you cannot or should not place composite. Eg in someone with a high decay rate, somewhere you cannot keep absolutely dry , someone who cannot tolerate keeping their mouth open for a long time. In large, particularly capped cusp , fillings.

As amalgams still have a survival rate of two to three times that of composite there are many reasons you might not want to place composites.

Composites also have their toxic components eg bis gma which is banned in babies bottles but is used in fissure sealants and composites https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/science-public/putting-bpa-based-dental-fillings-perspective

All filling materials have their risks, All medicine has its risks but at the moment amalgam fillings benefits still tip the balance in risk , benefit ratios.

brook2jack

If people were careful about what they ate and drank and brushed regularly with fluoride toothpaste 97% of all dental treatment would be unnecessary and we wouldn't have to worry so much about replacing tooth structure.

izzybella16

Anybody overly concerned about chemicals in composites should have all restorations replaced with 100% zirconia. But first port of call for all restorations should be some sort of composite. I find it hard to believe a composite could not be created that behaved exactly like amalgam.

izzybella16

Even the most careful will still develop caries on molars. The surfaces of the teeth are very susceptible to caries.

izzybella16

From now on I would have all molars fissure sealed every 3 years.

izzybella16

Back to the point NHS contracts on endodontics either need renegotiating or more emphasis on fissure sealants places on molar teeth.

brook2jack

Zirconia is a very destructive material to use for small fillings it needs a minimum of 1.5 MM. thickness., it is lab made so expensive to manufacture and is prone to fracture in areas of high stress on back teeth.

It is rubbish to say even the most careful will develop caries!! Decay rates plummeted during the second world war when sugar was rationed and I have patients in their 90s who have never had a filling, patients with severe physical and learning disabilities who have never had a filling and people with a very low sugar diet ie Inuits eating a traditional diet do not get decay.

Finally there is absolutely no evidence to say adults benefit routinely by fissure sealing and in fact by sealing some teeth you may well make it very difficult to spot the first signs of decay , which do not appear on X Ray's.

izzybella16

brook2jack wrote: »

Zirconia is a very destructive material to use for small fillings it needs a minimum of 1.5 MM. thickness., it is lab made so expensive to manufacture and is prone to fracture in areas of high stress on back teeth.

It is rubbish to say even the most careful will develop caries!! Decay rates plummeted during the second world war when sugar was rationed and I have patients in their 90s who have never had a filling, patients with severe physical and learning disabilities who have never had a filling and people with a very low sugar diet ie Inuits eating a traditional diet do not get decay.

Finally there is absolutely no evidence to say adults benefit routinely by fissure sealing and in fact by sealing some teeth you may well make it very difficult to spot the first signs of decay , which do not appear on X Ray's.

True no sugar would equal no decay but realistically the majority of people would really struggle to eat a sugar free diet.

brook2jack

izzybella16 wrote: »

Back to the point NHS contracts on endodontics either need renegotiating or more emphasis on fissure sealants places on molar teeth.

Did you read earlier post about monitoring of fissure sealant placing ? Did you read about community dentists visiting schools to place fissure sealants?

The NHS is strapped for cash. The idea that when some authorities will not fund certain cancer treatments or treatments for macular degeneration that will save eyesight that they will stump up £400 plus for endodontic specialists to save one tooth is not realistic.