|
Home > Archive > Dentistry > February 2005 > Dental dummy has questions & comments
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Dental dummy has questions & comments
|
|
| rev_otis_mcnatt@yahoo.com 2005-02-12, 1:32 pm |
| I just turned 48 this week, and believe it or not, I have
only been to the dentist _three_ times in my life; twice
in the fall of 1966 (one molar pulled, and its counterpart
on the other side had a large filling put in 7 days later,
which is still there btw), and once in March of 1975 (one
filling). My teeth are not gross or ugly at all, as might
be expected, and my gums are not receding and appear to be in good
shape too. I have always been a brushing fanatic almost.
One thing that has always made me wonder about the wisdom
that says one should go for regular visits is that when I
last visited the dentist (THIRTY years ago next month),
the guy told me that I needed to come back the next week
and get a filling in another tooth. The only thing I could
see with the tooth was what looked like a little whitish crack
or line on it (is this how decay begins?). Anyway, now, thirty
years later, that little white line is still there, and has
remained UNchanged (or even gotten smaller) over all these
years. If I had returned at that time and had him drill and
put a filling in the tooth, I feel now that that would've been
unwise in the long term, considering that drilling and filling
weakens teeth, yes? BOTH of my teeth that have been filled have
chipped over the years. None of the others have.
However, it appears that I may have to return to a dentist
for a little visit. The molar that has the 38+ year-old filling,
or the tooth behind it, is starting to cause mild pain that can
come and go by the minute. I can't tell which tooth is causing
the problem, but the one behind the filled one has a smallish,
dark cavity on the side that I have been aware of for over 20
years.
One reason I avoid the dental visits (other than the fact that
my teeth have never given me trouble) is that nowadays, they
want to do a whole series of x-rays and perhaps do more than
is actually needed, which is common in other fields as well.
I've paid for dental coverage for years and never used it,
but I don't like the idea of having a lot of unnecessay stuff
done, and I feel that many dentists would try to pressure me
in this way, considering my lack of visits in the past, and
my ignorance of the subject. Am I right? My philosophy is
to keep as much of my original teeth as possible, with minimal
alteration of them. I feel this way about my other body parts
as well. As I asked before, doesn't dental work weaken teeth?
Back in the old days when I went to dentists, they just did
what needed to be done to solve the problems at hand: cavities
were filled, and too-far-gone teeth were pulled. But it
doesn't appear to be that way today.
Now, a question for any dentists who may read this: This may
be a stupid question, but as I've said, I know nothing about
the subject. As I said, when I was nine years old, I had a molar
pulled; its counterpart on the other side was filled. But instead
of being one tooth short on the side where the extraction was done, I
still have the same number of teeth on either side of my lower jaw
(seven), which gives me of course 14 total on the lower jaw.
(For some reason, I never had the full set of 32 teeth.)
The surprising thing is that *another* tooth grew very near
to where the molar was extracted. It does NOT have a counterpart
on the other side. Is this normal, and do I just look stupid, or
was this unusual?
Enough rambling I guess. Any good feedback anxiously awaited!
--
Otis
| |
|
| On 11 Feb 2005 15:54:02 -0800, rev_otis_mcnatt@yahoo.com wrote:
>I just turned 48 this week, and believe it or not, I have
>only been to the dentist _three_ times in my life; twice
>in the fall of 1966 (one molar pulled, and its counterpart
>on the other side had a large filling put in 7 days later,
>which is still there btw), and once in March of 1975 (one
>filling). My teeth are not gross or ugly at all, as might
>be expected, and my gums are not receding and appear to be in good
>shape too. I have always been a brushing fanatic almost.
Prevention is the best medicine.
>
>One thing that has always made me wonder about the wisdom
>that says one should go for regular visits is that when I
>last visited the dentist (THIRTY years ago next month),
>the guy told me that I needed to come back the next week
>and get a filling in another tooth. The only thing I could
>see with the tooth was what looked like a little whitish crack
>or line on it (is this how decay begins?). Anyway, now, thirty
>years later, that little white line is still there, and has
>remained UNchanged (or even gotten smaller) over all these
>years. If I had returned at that time and had him drill and
>put a filling in the tooth, I feel now that that would've been
>unwise in the long term, considering that drilling and filling
>weakens teeth, yes?
Modern day dental restorations can actually be stronger
than original equipments. It depends on the restorative
material and the technics.
>BOTH of my teeth that have been filled have
>chipped over the years. None of the others have.
Both of your teeth ? You only have two ? <kidding>
Chipping indicates parafunction.
ie. clenching, grinding.
>
>However, it appears that I may have to return to a dentist
>for a little visit. The molar that has the 38+ year-old filling,
>or the tooth behind it, is starting to cause mild pain that can
>come and go by the minute.
A 38+ yo filling ? good longevity.
If you have pain, get it checked.
> I can't tell which tooth is causing
>the problem, but the one behind the filled one has a smallish,
>dark cavity on the side that I have been aware of for over 20
>years.
>
>One reason I avoid the dental visits (other than the fact that
>my teeth have never given me trouble) is that nowadays, they
>want to do a whole series of x-rays
You need a full series of x-rays so that you may get an accurate
diagnosis. Most dentists nowdays have intraoral cameras
and should sit down with you and show you your x-rays and
explain everything they see to you.
>and perhaps do more than
>is actually needed, which is common in other fields as well.
>I've paid for dental coverage for years and never used it,
>but I don't like the idea of having a lot of unnecessay stuff
>done, and I feel that many dentists would try to pressure me
>in this way, considering my lack of visits in the past, and
>my ignorance of the subject. Am I right?
No, pressure should not be put on a patient.
If they give you the hard sell used car spiel walk out.
> My philosophy is
>to keep as much of my original teeth as possible, with minimal
>alteration of them. I feel this way about my other body parts
>as well.
OEM is almost always better than replacements.
OEM = Original Equipment Manufacturer.
>As I asked before, doesn't dental work weaken teeth?
As I answered above, not necessarily.
>Back in the old days when I went to dentists, they just did
>what needed to be done to solve the problems at hand: cavities
>were filled, and too-far-gone teeth were pulled. But it
>doesn't appear to be that way today.
Ethical dentist still operate with the patients' best interest in
mind.
>
>Now, a question for any dentists who may read this: This may
>be a stupid question, but as I've said, I know nothing about
>the subject. As I said, when I was nine years old, I had a molar
>pulled; its counterpart on the other side was filled. But instead
>of being one tooth short on the side where the extraction was done, I
>still have the same number of teeth on either side of my lower jaw
>(seven), which gives me of course 14 total on the lower jaw.
>(For some reason, I never had the full set of 32 teeth.)
Would need to see a full set of x-rays to answer that.
>The surprising thing is that *another* tooth grew very near
>to where the molar was extracted. It does NOT have a counterpart
>on the other side. Is this normal, and do I just look stupid, or
>was this unusual?
No such thing as a stupid question but, with out some pictures
or x-rays, from here it is impossible to answer.
>
>Enough rambling I guess. Any good feedback anxiously awaited!
Welcomed to the group.
--
W_B
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
Take out the G'RBAGE
| |
| rev_otis_mcnatt@yahoo.com 2005-02-12, 1:32 pm |
|
W_B wrote:
> Both of your teeth ? You only have two ? <kidding>
> Chipping indicates parafunction.
> ie. clenching, grinding.
Nope, not in my case. Both chips occurred when I was eating
something hard. I remember I was eating a frozen Snickers bar
in 1986 when the upper one chipped...btw, I'm not overweight!
I've never been one to grind my teeth.
> A 38+ yo filling ? good longevity.
> If you have pain, get it checked.
It's still in there and solid as a rock, even though the tooth
is partially chipped. And my best guess is that the tooth behind
it is the culprit, but it's hard to tell exactly.
> You need a full series of x-rays so that you may get an accurate
> diagnosis. Most dentists nowdays have intraoral cameras
> and should sit down with you and show you your x-rays and
> explain everything they see to you.
But is all of this really necessary in most cases? It didn't
seem to be in the "old" days, and patients usually did just
fine with the doc using his observational skills and experience.
> Ethical dentist still operate with the patients' best interest in
> mind.
I know they're supposed to operate this way, and I'm sure many do,
but some won't. I guess I need to ask around. My wife had a good
deal of dental work done a few years back, and the guy seemed to
be ethical, at least at first. Maybe he was ethical, but just
scatterbrained, I don't know, but we decided to drop him.
> Welcomed to the group.
Thanks. I hope to get a little of a handle on a subject before
I walk into the dental office.
--
Otis
| |
|
| On 11 Feb 2005 17:45:44 -0800, rev_otis_mcnatt@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>W_B wrote:
>
>
>Nope, not in my case. Both chips occurred when I was eating
>something hard. I remember I was eating a frozen Snickers bar
>in 1986 when the upper one chipped...btw, I'm not overweight!
>I've never been one to grind my teeth.
Sorry, teeth just don't break even on frozen Snickers bars
with out being over stressed either by clenching or grinding.
Micro fracturing is not visible without magnification.
>
>
>It's still in there and solid as a rock, even though the tooth
>is partially chipped. And my best guess is that the tooth behind
>it is the culprit, but it's hard to tell exactly.
Another 'chipped' tooth ? Definitely parafunction.
Check out headacheprevention.com.
Without a radiograph (x-ray) I can't tell either.
>
>
>But is all of this really necessary in most cases? It didn't
>seem to be in the "old" days, and patients usually did just
>fine with the doc using his observational skills and experience.
>
The standard of care is considerably better in modern times.
Get the full set of x-rays. I recommend once per 5 years,
maybe longer, maybe shorter, depending on the patient.
>
>I know they're supposed to operate this way, and I'm sure many do,
>but some won't. I guess I need to ask around. My wife had a good
>deal of dental work done a few years back, and the guy seemed to
>be ethical, at least at first. Maybe he was ethical, but just
>scatterbrained, I don't know, but we decided to drop him.
>
Ask friends, colleagues, co-workers, etc...
a satisfied patient is the most likely indicator of
a good practitioner.
>
>Thanks. I hope to get a little of a handle on a subject before
>I walk into the dental office.
No problem, there are many good practitioners on this NG.
Easier to catch most of us during the week, week-ends are
variable.
--
W_B
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
Take out the G'RBAGE
| |
| jdrew63929@aol.com 2005-02-12, 1:32 pm |
| Newsgroups: sci.med.dentistry
From: rev_otis_mcn...@yahoo.com - Find messages by this author
Date: 11 Feb 2005 15:54:02 -0800
Local: Fri, Feb 11 2005 3:54 pm
Subject: Dental dummy has questions & comments
Dummy lying dentists HERE will have dummy lying answers
| |
| Joel M. Eichen 2005-02-12, 1:32 pm |
| On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 01:10:37 GMT, W_B <no_one@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
>Prevention is the best medicine.
True.
In many studies the areas of the country where the people having the
best dentitions, are the same areas with severe SHORTAGES of dentists!
Joel
| |
| Joel M. Eichen 2005-02-12, 1:32 pm |
| On 11 Feb 2005 17:45:44 -0800, rev_otis_mcnatt@yahoo.com wrote:
>W_B wrote:
>
>
>Nope, not in my case. Both chips occurred when I was eating
>something hard. I remember I was eating a frozen Snickers bar
>in 1986 when the upper one chipped...btw, I'm not overweight!
>I've never been one to grind my teeth.
About both teeth ...
How can they chip with one way up front and the other one way in the
back on the udder side?
| |
| Joel M. Eichen 2005-02-12, 1:32 pm |
| On 11 Feb 2005 22:01:06 -0800, "jdrew63929@aol.com"
<jdrew63929@aol.com> wrote:
>Newsgroups: sci.med.dentistry
>From: rev_otis_mcn...@yahoo.com - Find messages by this author
>Date: 11 Feb 2005 15:54:02 -0800
>Local: Fri, Feb 11 2005 3:54 pm
>Subject: Dental dummy has questions & comments
>
>Dummy lying dentists HERE will have dummy lying answers
See what I mean about Jan?
| |
| rev_otis_mcnatt@yahoo.com 2005-02-12, 1:32 pm |
| W_B wrote:
> Sorry, teeth just don't break even on frozen Snickers bars
> with out being over stressed either by clenching or grinding.
As I stated, the only teeth that have chipped are the two
that have had the fillings. One is on the lower jaw (the
one with the large 38 year-old filling) and the other
one is just above it on the upper jaw, same side of mouth.
I have apparently always chewed primarily on the right side,
hence the need for the fillings there.
> Another 'chipped' tooth ?
Yes, as I have already stated. I'll say it once more: the two
teeth that have fillings are the two that have chipped. They
were weakened by the filling procedure.
>Definitely parafunction.
> Check out headacheprevention.com.
I can definitely tell you that I've never been one to grind
my teeth, awake or asleep. And believe it or not, I've never
had a headache.
--
Otis
| |
| rev_otis_mcnatt@yahoo.com 2005-02-12, 1:32 pm |
| Joel M. Eichen wrote:
> About both teeth ...
>
> How can they chip with one way up front and the other one way in >the
back on the udder side?
They are both in the rear, on the right side of my mouth.
One is right above the other, i.e. one on upper jaw, the
other on lower jaw. See my reponse to W_B from today.
--
Otis
| |
| Peter Meiers 2005-02-15, 8:21 am |
| Joel M. Eichen wrote:
> In many studies the areas of the country where the people having the
> best dentitions, are the same areas with severe SHORTAGES of dentists!
which means: less preventive extractions?
Peter
--
-History of fluorine, fluoride and fluoridation-:
--- http://PMeiers.bei.t-online.de/index.htm ---
----------------------------------------------------
|
| |
|
|