Dentists refusing to do costly treatments?

I have an NHS dentist and have had a root canal.

If you have enough teeth to chew without this one then removing it would be a suitable option and as this is the lower cost to the NHS, this is all they will offer
I know times are hard but it’s well eorth saving a few wood or using a credit card for work such as this, because the NHS won’t fix it. Many teeth needing a root canal will need a specialist and this will never be on the nhs as an nhs dentist can’t do it

I am , actually , quite content that my dental education and subsequent career placed an emphasis on continuing education, research and how to read and parse information from research papers.

It has informed and changed the way I have practiced over the decades.

”They” (world health organisation, European Union scientific committee , various countries drug and medical devices advisories , etc) never “lied” they presented evidence which, as a professional , I read over the decades as did most dental professionals and formed my own opinions .

The idea that ignorant professionals buried their heads in the sand and blindly followed some big pharma conspiracy and blithely followed advice is strange as the safety of amalgam has been discussed in both a measured way via research over many decades and unmeasured way via media from Tom Mangolds “documentary” in the 90s to you tube and tik tok more recently. It is even more strange as dental professionals are most at risk from amalgam dangers and female dental professionals of child bearing potential will be even more sensitive to potential dangers.

It is difficult to see why on Earth anyone would think a group of well educated and aware people would happily ignore a massive “threat” to their health !

All of which is rather moot as better alternatives to amalgam are continually being developed . However what is not moot is there is certainly a group of people promoting expensive protocols etc for removing amalgam that have scammed people so badly that many charities etc multiple sclerosis society , cancer charities etc have had to warn people against falling for these false claims .

All scientific studies have limitations, not sure why that is news to you. The 8 studies your Cochrane review cites also have limitations as does the review itself. But there is evidence indicating that dentists have more mercury in them against the general population and that this may lead to detrimental health effects. Ignore these facts as you wish. I know, as a dentist, it must be a tough fact to comprehend that you’ve swallowed a lie.

Im not sure how they can have been educated properly when many of the dental regulatry bodies denied that amalgam leaked mercury. In fact dentist’s were falsely taught that once placed, the mercury is locked in. It’s laughable based on basic chemistry principles.

Did you read and understand the studies you’ve quoted ?

This is from the study pulling various papers together

The quality assessment of the included studies revealed several methodological limitations

in other words what you may think the studies show conclusively doesn’t .

This is why things like Cochrane reviews are important and looking at what papers actually say and who publishes them is also important because of confirmation bias , in other words if you go looking for something in research you are likely to find it confirmed.

All undergraduate and post graduate dental education includes extensive education on dental materials , toxicity and risk/benefit . The fact that the majority of dentists will not only have placed and removed amalgams but will also have them in their own mouths would surely indicate a near suicidal level of disinterest that you are indicating , when the dental workforce would , itself , be the overwhelming victim of it’s supposed poor education.

If they’re not given enough funding to cover the cost of the procedure then they are paying out of their own pocket for your dental care.

I never said that dentists are part of a conspiracy, simply that many of them are poorly educated and oblivious to a toxic material that they placed in their patients mouths.

Thankfully there are dentists out there who are educated and open minded to different approaches.

It’s interesting that despite being the “material of choice (in certain areas)” they have favoured the discontinuation of amalgam due to its toxic effects on on the environment. But like you, no explanation for why it’s toxic to the environment but not a human.

There are studies out there showing greater mercury levels in dentists which is interesting.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC13213647/

https://eprints.gla.ac.uk/2514/

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26581313/

The EU scientific committee is obviously also talking nonsense

Dietary intake is the most important source of non-occupational exposure to methylmercury, with fish and other seafood products being the dominant source of this highly absorbable form in the diet

this is where that quote is from https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/opinions_layman/en/dental-amalgam/l-3/3-mercury-exposure.htm

this is also the opinion around the world eg US , New Zealand , Canada etc https://www.epa.gov/mercury/how-people-are-exposed-mercury

Dentists who have both amalgam in their mouths and place and remove amalgams every day .

What is the interest for dentists ,who are exposed to many times more amalgam every day than anyone else will see in a lifetime , who would be the canaries in the coal mine for health effects of amalgam, in taking part in a “conspiracy” to hush up effects of amalgam?

The first thing the EU paper says is in certain clinical areas amalgam is the material of choice. This is after 7 years of investigation from a body that has no commercial interest either in placing amalgam or in charging huge amounts for dubious protocols, supplements for removing amalgams due to dubious health claims .

But that person is taking nonsense because it’s well established fact that dental amalgam is a major source of mercury for humans. Just shouting the word quack doesn’t detract from facts.

The same could be argued for the many dentists involved in an industry which has placed millions of amalgams and made money from doing so.

But the research papers cited are not conducted by the IAOMT if you cared to look. In fact, many were conducted long before holistic dentists became a thing. They all provide evidence that amalgams leak mercury which is detrimental to human health.

Your very citation from the EU literally agrees that amalgams leak mercury and that this is toxic!

Still waiting on that explanation as to how amalgams are being phased out due to toxic effects on the environment but safe in a human mouth?

No the ADA , WHO and various dental professional organisations also have condemned IAOMT https://quackwatch.org/consumer-education/nonrecorg/iaomt/

Thankfully just one individual’s view.

A little history on “holistic dentists “ and IAOMT https://quackwatch.org/related/holisticdent/

As the years go by the equipment and techniques for root treatment have improved and teeth can be saved that were not salvageable in the past .

A specialist will have spent time and money in getting specialist qualifications and tens of thousands in buying equipment such as operating microscopes and specialist materials such as MDTA.

On the whole the NHS does not employ specialist endodontists as it is difficult to justify spending hundreds or thousands saving one tooth when the limited budget also has to cover reconstruction for cancer and cleft palate patients, for example.

If a tooth is deemed complex according to nationally recognised guidelines, it is not defensible for a dentist , private or NHS to attempt it without the training and equipment. So you have to be referred and in the vast majority of areas that referral will be private .

It can hardly be said that IAOMT is unbiased as many organisations , including the World health organisation, have criticised their stance on many subjects from root canal therapy to fluoride etc.

It’s important to recognise they are an organisation of “holistic” dentists and the research they publish will suffer from confirmation bias .

The Cochrane review and European Union do not suffer from the same bias .

It is somewhat baffling that there is a theory that dentists are suppressing the dangers of amalgam when they are the group that is the most likely to suffer any potential health consequences . The fact the dental team are not , either historically or presently, suffering high death or disease rates according to most accepted research is an interesting long term research statistic.

Your citation lists 8 studies…

”We searched scientific databases until 16 February 2021 and found eight relevant studies. The studies evaluated 3285 composite fillings and 1955 amalgam fillings; however, it is unclear how many participants received these fillings. The exact age of participants was unclear in some studies, but the studies included both children and adults. The studies took place in the UK, the USA, Portugal, Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, and Turkey.”

My citation lists over 400 across many decades from many, many researchers across the globe.

https://iaomt.org/wp-content/uploads/article_ZiffBibliography.pdf

I don’t disagree that a massive amount of mercury is released during and after amalgam installation. What you and your fellow dental colleagues seem ignorant to or to refuse to accept is that amalgams release mercury 24/7 and never stop. This means that individuals with amalgams are constantly exposed to mercury.

iaomt.org/wp-content/uploads/article_ZiffBibliography.pdf

But again, you refuse to explain how amalgams are toxic once removed and treated as a biohazard but safe in the mouth? I really would love to know the chemistry involved?

Why did the dental community refuse, and in some cases, still do ignore the fact that amalgams release mercury vapour constantly?

Yeah they literally lose money if they do certain complex things.
It's also true that the NHS doesn't cover root canal in certain circumstances as apparently they don't have the specialist equipment? This might have been a ruse as they told me I had to have it private!

Oh so something does need to go in its place really (if you’re conscious about that). I had one from the back and dentist recommended bridge or implants but as you can’t see it I had neither but obviously if it’s at the front your in a different position

Again, look at the cochrane review which states “Overall, the evidence suggests that amalgam restorations are effective, enduring, and safe, while composite resin restorations are more likely to fail and lead to secondary caries. However, the studies in this review were quite old, and composite resin materials have likely improved since the included studies were conducted. Patients and dental providers can discuss together which material they want to use when permanent teeth in the back of the mouth require fillings in the dental clinic. Governments around the world are trying to reduce the use of dental amalgam (according to the Minamata Convention on Mercury), and so each local area will have their own regulations and guidance. “ www.cochrane.org/evidence/CD005620_tooth-colored-resin-fillings-compared-amalgam-fillings-permanent-teeth-back-mouth

and the EU report on amalgam use posted above.

You are quite right we are exposed to mercury in both the placing of and removal of amalgams . However extensive peer reviewed analysis of multiple studies , not just one or two , has revealed no link between amalgam and increased morbidity or mortality. Tellingly in the populations most exposed to amalgam , in both their own mouths and in their everyday working life , ie dental staff there is no increase in morbidity or mortality when all well researched and reviewed papers are considered.

With any research there will always be papers that differ from the consensus. That is why reviews such as Cochrane are so important as they look at all papers, how well the research is put together , any bias, the number of subjects and methodology . They then collate them and provide a balanced view.

This has become increasingly important as people can make life changing decisions based on a flawed research paper eg Andrew Wakefield and MMR which has resulted in multiple fatalities and injuries because people didn’t not vaccinate their children based on a paper which, when reviewed properly, revealed serious flaws.

It is also why people should not confuse serious research that is peer reviewed and balanced against other papers with you tube videos and single group or opinion papers .

You must have missed my link to the myriad of peer reviewed articles showing that amalgams leak mercury which is detrimental to human health.

https://iaomt.org/wp-content/uploads/article_ZiffBibliography.pdf

You also are not familiar with Professor Alfred Stock who published his experimental findings showing that mercury leaks from amalgams and gets incorporated into human tissues.

Why do the FDA & BDA now acknowledge that amalgams off gas mercury vapour?

But you have not explained how amalgams are toxic enough for the environment to be disposed off as biohazard waste but safe in a human mouth?

Your link also clearly states that amalgams leak mercury and that this is toxic. One can argue about levels and at what point that turns into disease but the facts are amalgams leak mercury and mercury is toxic to human health.

I’m sorry but YouTube videos are not peer reviewed research and have no place in making educated clinical decisions and all dentists undergo years of materials science education.

Materials which have health problems like formocreosol , endomethasone , beechwood’s creosote etc have been stopped in clinical use because proper research indicates the risk benefit ratio weighted against their use. Materials science in dentistry is a busy discipline.

Cochrane reports which collate research to provide a scientific consensus and other reports such as that collated by the EU , again using peer reviewed research , all consider , in the right clinical circumstances, amalgam to be a material of choice . Long term collated studies of dental staff who are exposed to amalgam and mercury vapour daily for decades , shows no increase in morbidity and mortality .

Amalgam is being discontinued because dental research is continually improving materials being used , although for many dentists the very best material to use in the mouth , gold , has been used for centuries back to Etruscan times and beyond.

For a properly research overview of the use of amalgam with multiple , peer reviewed papers see https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/emerging/docs/scenihr_o_046.pdf

It is sad and frightening to see another poorly educated dentist. It is established fact that amalgams leak mercury. Even the FDA finally acknowledged this a few years ago.

Dental Amalgam Fillings | FDA

In fact professor Alfred Stock showed this almost a century ago along with a series of elegant experiments showing that mercury bioaccumulates in the body including sensitive organs like the brain. He was ignored by the dental community.

Feel free to explore the myriad of links below to the research.

https://iaomt.org/wp-content/uploads/article_ZiffBibliography.pdf

But if you want an easier visual showing mercury released from amalgam, see below.

001 SMOKING TEETH - YouTube

Mercury Dental Fillings Raise Blood Mercury to Dangerous Levels in 100+ Million Americans - YouTube

Boyd Haley PhD measures mercury vapor from amalgams - YouTube

Boyd Haley PhD funny amalgam product story - YouTube

The government has a limited pot of money so they have to pick and choose where they spend it. They don’t always choose well but unfortunately, dentistry is one of the things they have chosen not to spend it on.

UK Dentistry is no worse than another country - you just need to pay for it