Live data from Hacker News

Routine dental X-rays are not backed by evidence

arstechnica.com

101–110 of 390 posts

Re: Routine dental X-rays are not backed by evidence

#103
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's one of these areas where people (including medical professionals) hold strong beliefs, but then it turns out that there are other highly-developed countries where this is not routinely practiced, and the outcomes aren't necessarily different. Routine wisdom teeth removal is not a thing in most of Europe. Another random example are colonoscopies and routine flu vaccines (except for the elderly).

I've generally assumed the simplest explanation is that many of these weakly-supported procedures are regular, consistent income streams for the people who perform them in the US: my four wisdom teeth (that were causing me serious issues at age 19) cost $2k to remove nearly 20 years ago, and I know colonoscopies are billed to insurance in the thousands. There's not much incentive to move to cheaper tests or wait-and-…

It's not always true though. My dentist in Europe pushed me to get my wisdom teeth removed early "because you're going to need to get them removed eventually anyway" at a government clinic with no profit incentive.

Re: Routine dental X-rays are not backed by evidence

#104
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you'll find it useful that a double-blind study found no improvement in outcome from use of a parachute when jumping out of a helicopter. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300808/

Your comment is misled. This is a systemic review. A RCT would absolutely find a difference. The whole point of this satire is to point out that there's not always studies on what you want to know. "No randomised controlled trials of parachute use have been undertaken" Flossing has absolutely been studied. Professional flossing seems effective at combating gum disease. Telling people to floss doesn't seem to be. It's…

Ah, you're right I grabbed the wrong paper. I presume the other commenter (hervature ) also knew what paper I meant.

But yes, the item you want studied might not have been studied. ("However, the trial was only able to enroll participants on small stationary aircraft on the ground, suggesting cautious extrapolation to high altitude jumps.")

https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k5094

Re: Routine dental X-rays are not backed by evidence

#105
Here in the US, I do 0 medical procedures and only would go to the ER if I broke a bone or something. Thailand, India, Singapore all cheaper + better care.

Incentives are 100% misaligned and even good actors are forced to shorten your lifespan/quality of life to make somebody money

Re: Routine dental X-rays are not backed by evidence

#106
post #29

Isn't flossing not supported by science also, but all the news articles said you should keep flossing?

That story is because no-one had thought to study it so there was no scientific evidence that it made any difference. Not that a study had found it made no difference.

Re: Routine dental X-rays are not backed by evidence

#107
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment is misled. This is a systemic review. A RCT would absolutely find a difference. The whole point of this satire is to point out that there's not always studies on what you want to know. "No randomised controlled trials of parachute use have been undertaken" Flossing has absolutely been studied. Professional flossing seems effective at combating gum disease. Telling people to floss doesn't seem to be. It's…

Ah, you're right I grabbed the wrong paper. I presume the other commenter (hervature ) also knew what paper I meant. But yes, the item you want studied might not have been studied. ("However, the trial was only able to enroll participants on small stationary aircraft on the ground, suggesting cautious extrapolation to high altitude jumps.") https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k5094

OK. So another low effort comment on a serious subthread.

Re: Routine dental X-rays are not backed by evidence

#108
post #29

Isn't flossing not supported by science also, but all the news articles said you should keep flossing?

If flossing lowers the risk of certain types of gum disease and certain types of gum disease are associated with Alzheimer’s, then maybe flossing is (indirectly) good for your brain. https://www.health.harvard.edu/mind-and-mood/good-oral-healt...

I thought it was gum disease and heart disease?

Re: Routine dental X-rays are not backed by evidence

#109
Current final year dental student pitching in here. While dentists of the past may push for unnecessary annual radiographs, the curriculum in dental school has changed to favour evidence-based dentistry. Annual bitewings are only indicated if you're a high caries risk, and, as the article mentions, 2-3 years if you're low caries risk. So your younger/newer dentist will be following much better protocols (and hopefully not scamming you)!

Re: Routine dental X-rays are not backed by evidence

#110
post #90
post #11

> "Financial aspects of dental radiography also deserve further study," Feit added No joke. That is a major money maker. There is minimal cost per-use and your insurance pays $200 for it (my last one was $186.00 for instance). The dentists would be crazy not to recommend them as of often as possible. Fluoride "rinses" are likely up there too. Rinse for a few seconds and they charge the insurance $50 or something for…

I think most private dentists charge about £20/$25 for a radiography in the UK. In the US, this pricing seems also available - https://www.teethtalkgirl.com/dental-health/cost-for-dental-... . Interestingly, I lived in Central Europe for a while and all my private dentists just used visual inspection for teeth. I never had an issue with that, all decay was spotted in time and in many cases earlier than with the x-ray…

It is still like this.the only time I had x-rays at a dentist in Poland is for a root canal work.

However, I did have a dentist recommend a 3d x-ray once.

Post reply on HN