Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Routine dental X-rays are not backed by evidence

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 390 posts

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

#381

Post by dnissley »

r00fus wrote: post #335
dnissley wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pensioners gotta get paid somehow

That's a wild take. Hedge funds and PE have corrupted and taken over said pension funds then pushing funds into these usurious ventures by claiming that the pension fund "needs to keep up with the market" is another huge sign of decay.

Sure, this was kind of a tongue in cheek comment. But the door is open to these types of investments to the degree that state pensions are underfunded. And PE is only finishing the job of corruption started by the politicians who underfunded these liabilities for decades.

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

#382

Post by IIsi50MHz »

xyst wrote: post #216
washadjeffmad wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one of those statements, like a natural empiricist saying they don't believe in the big bang, that people tend to latch onto and run with without stopping to evaluate. Flossing daily isn't necessary if you're an adequate manual brusher. Relatively few people are adequate manual brushers. Buy a good electric toothbrush, floss periodically.

> floss periodically I used to do this periodically because I hated doing it. But as a result, plaque would build up. Especially on the front bottom incisors. Eventually added it to my daily routine after the nth time being told to floss daily. And now my dental cleanings are more like spot checks. I suppose it’s anecdotal and unique to everyone though. Something about mouth flora.

But…flossy daily is literally flossing periodically. Or did you mean you used to do an unspecified longer period? Or aperiodically?

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

#383

Post by Doxin »

tomcam wrote: post #250
pandatigox wrote: post #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 hopefull…

Sorry to hijack this, but have you heard of people on whom no local anesthesia works? I have to be put under general anesthesia (yes, requiring an actual anesthetist at an extra $8,000 or so). The pain is not endurable otherwise.

Hi! The local anesthesia works poorly on me. To the point of the dentist using enough to where I can't feel my eyebrow. It's bearable but very much not fun. I've been largely just bearing down,but then recently I had a root canal done by a specialist.

I dunno what exactly he did, but him applying the anesthetic sucked way worse, but I didn't feel anything whatsoever during the root canal itself. So I'm definitely asking my regular dentist next time if he knows of any anesthetic methods that involve injecting it really slowly and it hurting, and if not if he could maybe have some conversations with his colleague about that.

So I guess nothing super helpful, other than the knowledge that the way the anesthetic is done has a LOT of influence on how well it works.

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

#384

Post by codr7 »

red-iron-pine wrote: post #227
codr7 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The madness.

this is a bad Florida-Man joke

Far from a joke, it's very likely that some of the dysfunction we see is triggered by all the crap we put in our bodies to generate more profits.

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

#385

Post by codr7 »

LorenPechtel wrote: post #367
codr7 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fluoridation started because they wanted to get rid of toxic byproducts from making aluminum, the rest is marketing.

What's added to tap water isn't the compound used in aluminum refining. Thus they would have to separate it out and at that point they can simply react it with aluminum and continue to use it. There's nothing to discard.

It was a byproduct as far as I remember, finding good information is getting more difficult every year.

Why is it so difficult to believe? Haven't we seen enough examples of people in power not giving a shit?

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

#386

Post by fennecbutt »

mtalantikite wrote: post #252
pandatigox wrote: post #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 hopefull…

I started going to a new dental office a few years back with a bunch of younger staff here in Brooklyn. They clearly spent a ton of money on the build out, and all the dentists were probably 30s/40s. They did the typical "you skipped your x-rays last checkup, you're now 1.5 years behind. You need to do those now" thing. When I asked how much it'd cost out of pocket, they told me an update was $80. I thought "oh wow,…

Damn, even fully private in the UK I pay a fraction of a fraction of that.

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

#387

Post by MrSkelter »

pandatigox wrote: post #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 hopefull…

As someone who has lived on 4 continents the dentistry industry in the US is radically corrupt. As well as studies proving this, the fact dentists are rewarded for treatment means that even with the best intentions dentists are motivated to over-react under the guise of being “preventative”. Hence the American idea that wisdom teeth should almost always be removed, while in other countries the “crowding” issues Americans have been taught to fear only become problematic in a minority of cases and can be dealt with as and when they appear.

X-rays are just a revenue stream. Funnily enough Americans I know who experience dentistry in places like Scandinavia are often confused as to how little is done, despite outcomes being better overall.

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

#388

Post by tomcam »

Doxin wrote: post #383
tomcam wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry to hijack this, but have you heard of people on whom no local anesthesia works? I have to be put under general anesthesia (yes, requiring an actual anesthetist at an extra $8,000 or so). The pain is not endurable otherwise.

Hi! The local anesthesia works poorly on me. To the point of the dentist using enough to where I can't feel my eyebrow. It's bearable but very much not fun. I've been largely just bearing down,but then recently I had a root canal done by a specialist. I dunno what exactly he did, but him applying the anesthetic sucked way worse, but I didn't feel anything whatsoever during the root canal itself. So I'm definitely ask…

Thanks for sharing. I have indeed had long slow injections and seemingly every other way to deliver local anesthetic. It hurts but that'd be fine if it worked. Doesn't work at all with me. I feel like I'm being drilled, electrocuted, and whacked with a baseball bat at the same time.

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

#389

Post by tomcam »

EasyMark wrote: post #268
pandatigox wrote: post #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 hopefull…

Kind of off topic, I had a dentist say “that needs to come out” for a wisdom tooth. I was of the opinion “it doesn’t hurt and it’s not even sensitive, so it stays in”, it was the only cavity I’d had in a very long time and I haven’t had any since. So we argued for 10 years over it to the point it became a joke between us. Well finally it became sensitive (not painful, but sugar and cold would set off a little pain) a…

I think we're learning these stories are more common than dentists want us to know.

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

#390

Post by IIsi50MHz »

IIsi50MHz wrote: post #382
xyst wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> floss periodically I used to do this periodically because I hated doing it. But as a result, plaque would build up. Especially on the front bottom incisors. Eventually added it to my daily routine after the nth time being told to floss daily. And now my dental cleanings are more like spot checks. I suppose it’s anecdotal and unique to everyone though. Something about mouth flora.

But…flossy daily is literally flossing periodically. Or did you mean you used to do an unspecified longer period? Or aperiodically?

flossing*
Post reply on HN