From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Mercury in dental fillings?
Organization: WP Group
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 10:27:37 GMT

Russell Lawrence writes:
rl> Of the 100,000 (plus/minus) dentists in north america, I'll bet that
rl> 99% of them had prayed (literally or figuratively) at one time or
rl> another that amalgams really were toxic;  yet the scientific research
rl> demonstrated that this simply wasn't the case.  Both the ADA and 
rl> the AGD took a lot of flak after exposing the prevalence 
rl> and nature of this particular bit of quackery, and several 
rl> employees very nearly lost their jobs because they stood up for 
rl> the truth, rather than economic self-interest. 

Gordon Banks writes:
gb> Listen, this is really going too far, Russ.  Do you really
gb> think 99% of dentists hope that they've really been hurting
gb> people by putting fillings in their mouths?  

That's not exactly what I said, Gordon.  I stated that dentists 
throughout north america fantasized about scientific verification 
of the toxic amalgam theory.  A person with a logical mind would 
quickly realize that such verification would have entailed a 
widespread threat to public health, but we're talking about a 
fantasy here... not a logical argument.  In dental dreamland, 
it's possible to have toxic amalgams and lots of new business 
that would save dentistry from an economic depression, yet not 
hurt patients at all.  

As I pointed out previously, I have a great deal of respect for 
organized dentistry precisely because most practitioners finally 
got a grip on their ethical responsibilities and began doing
something to alleviate a problem that was getting totally out
of control.  

gb> Good thing there are no dentists on this net.  I play basketball 
gb> with some dentists from our dental school, and they are just 
gb> ordinary people, really, not fiends out of hell.  They like to 
gb> think what they do is making people better off, not poisoning 
gb> them.  I think you should retract that statement.  I've never met 
gb> a dentist that is telling patients to get rid of their amalgams, 
gb> and think it is a small group of quacks that is doing it.  

Either you don't know many dentists, or the dentists that you 
know are exceptional in some way.

The scam was not the work of a few isolated individuals, nor was 
it confined to "kooks" or "oddballs" as you apparently believe.  
It peaked in 1987, and in that same year, the AGD published a 
landmark article in which the leadership of the organization 
lamented the fact that that well over a hundred postdoc courses 
had been taught in 1986 in accredited US dental schools on 
treatment modalities that were blatantly bogus, including the 
toxic amalgam scam.  Again, we're talking about post-doc courses 
in accredited dental schools, not some cheap underground newsletter.  

Not to far from where I'm sitting at the moment, the legendary 
Hal Huggins gave a course on vitamin techniques for treating
"toxic amalgams" back in 1985 under the official auspices of 
the LSU School of Dentistry.  According to one of the professors 
who reviewed the presentation, Huggins' course drew the greatest 
attendance of any course offered that year.  The attendees learned
how to sell vitamins, how to "test" amalgam emissions, and how
to treat amalgam "poisoning", but most important of all, they walked
away with CE credit for taking the course.  

I would estimate that 30% of the dentists in my state have been 
directly involved in some form of quackery over the past ten 
years or so.  (Examples would include: TMJ therapy and TMJ 
surgery, toxic amalgams, crozat orthodontia, sargenti 
endodontics, various vitamin scams, etc.) Dr. John Dodes in New 
York and Dr. Ed Zinman in California are well-known, national 
critics of dental quackery and if I'm not mistaken they came up 
with similar estimates for their respective states.  

Dental quackery's still not dead, by any means, nor is it the 
handiwork of a few isolated individuals.  As an example, the 
stats show that there are roughly three times as many 
practitioners of the infamous sargenti endodontic technique
in the US as there are board-certified endodontists.   According
to Norman Schaffler, an expert on dental malpractice, umbrella
coverage for sargenti practitioners is the number one money
maker for the major dental malpractice liability carrier in the
state of California.   

Incidently, congress conducted hearings on TMJ surgery a month
or so ago.  I haven't seen transcripts, but I've heard that
criminal charges may be fired against the folks responsible
for marketing teflon joint replacements.  

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ
Newsgroups: sci.med