Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Dental abuse of children...wow!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="keith99" data-source="post: 68003878" data-attributes="member: 211648"><p>My father was a children's dentist and I worked with him for several years. (doing his lab work paid great!).</p><p></p><p>There is one thing early in the article that is a giant red flag for me:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The dentist is quite correct on that, however this rarely was said in dad's practice because few parents expected to go in with their child. When a parent did we were pretty sure the child would be a problem.</p><p></p><p>After that not so good start things go so sour for me in all sorts of directions. The article is clearly designed to demonize the dentist involved, likely with good cause. I so wish they had not because some of their over the top stuff leads me to distrust them as a source. And there is so much that seems flat out surrealistic. I'm simply going to point out some things perhaps not obvious to others.</p><p></p><p>First extracting teeth under local anesthesia is not very painful. Hardly torture. There are exceptions. We would often extract 4 teeth, usually bicuspids, for orthodontic reasons. The actual extraction of the teeth would take 10 minutes tops. Administering the local anesthesia took longer and I just mean the injection, not the waiting for it to become effective. What could be painful and sure as heck was scary for a kid was when they had a badly decayed tooth that had to go and when gripped with the forceps it would break into pieces. That meant digging with root picks to get every piece of the roots out. Not fun at all. (Think of your mother trying to get out a splinter using a needle time 10 to 100).</p><p></p><p>We would also fairly often remove a primary tooth that was not coming out naturally. These would range from simply timid patients where dad would actually simply grip the tooth (well what was left of it) between thumb and forefinger and pluck it out with less pain than a shot of Novocain to times when the root was being absorbed poorly and there was a long but thin root remaining. That last not horrible, but often an x-ray needed to be taken to be sure the entire root was removed.</p><p></p><p>Now for the part that really confuses me. The article shows only what look to be sound teeth without any sign of the root even starting to be absorbed. I'm at a loss to even figure out the problem with the first tooth was. No way this should take 3 hours and typically medicaid does not pay well (Ok my knowledge there is well out of date). But even at full price taking 3 hours for simple extractions is not an effective way to generate revenue.</p><p></p><p>Quite possible the dentist involved deserves significant jail time, but also quite possible the teeth in the photo as just stock footage. I'm inclined to wait before any judgement. But I'm not returning the torches and pitchforks to my local hardware store quite yet either.</p><p></p><p>EDIT: Listened to the video. Crowns for a 3 year old? No way is that a reasonable procedure and that a no brainer. No details needed. That Medicaid did not deny and then investigate is inexcusable. </p><p></p><p>If accurate it implies corruption on the other end also. The if accurate part is important however. There are procedures that news sources and parents might call a crown that are really quite different from a crown.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="keith99, post: 68003878, member: 211648"] My father was a children's dentist and I worked with him for several years. (doing his lab work paid great!). There is one thing early in the article that is a giant red flag for me: The dentist is quite correct on that, however this rarely was said in dad's practice because few parents expected to go in with their child. When a parent did we were pretty sure the child would be a problem. After that not so good start things go so sour for me in all sorts of directions. The article is clearly designed to demonize the dentist involved, likely with good cause. I so wish they had not because some of their over the top stuff leads me to distrust them as a source. And there is so much that seems flat out surrealistic. I'm simply going to point out some things perhaps not obvious to others. First extracting teeth under local anesthesia is not very painful. Hardly torture. There are exceptions. We would often extract 4 teeth, usually bicuspids, for orthodontic reasons. The actual extraction of the teeth would take 10 minutes tops. Administering the local anesthesia took longer and I just mean the injection, not the waiting for it to become effective. What could be painful and sure as heck was scary for a kid was when they had a badly decayed tooth that had to go and when gripped with the forceps it would break into pieces. That meant digging with root picks to get every piece of the roots out. Not fun at all. (Think of your mother trying to get out a splinter using a needle time 10 to 100). We would also fairly often remove a primary tooth that was not coming out naturally. These would range from simply timid patients where dad would actually simply grip the tooth (well what was left of it) between thumb and forefinger and pluck it out with less pain than a shot of Novocain to times when the root was being absorbed poorly and there was a long but thin root remaining. That last not horrible, but often an x-ray needed to be taken to be sure the entire root was removed. Now for the part that really confuses me. The article shows only what look to be sound teeth without any sign of the root even starting to be absorbed. I'm at a loss to even figure out the problem with the first tooth was. No way this should take 3 hours and typically medicaid does not pay well (Ok my knowledge there is well out of date). But even at full price taking 3 hours for simple extractions is not an effective way to generate revenue. Quite possible the dentist involved deserves significant jail time, but also quite possible the teeth in the photo as just stock footage. I'm inclined to wait before any judgement. But I'm not returning the torches and pitchforks to my local hardware store quite yet either. EDIT: Listened to the video. Crowns for a 3 year old? No way is that a reasonable procedure and that a no brainer. No details needed. That Medicaid did not deny and then investigate is inexcusable. If accurate it implies corruption on the other end also. The if accurate part is important however. There are procedures that news sources and parents might call a crown that are really quite different from a crown. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Dental abuse of children...wow!
Top
Bottom