Velscope Cancer Screening

CHERISH YOUR TEETH---YOU ONLY HAVE ONE SET!!

FROM: The AARP MAGAZINE,
Want to keep your teeth: Follow the surprisong tips:

Break a sweat: Excercise may lower the risk of gum dfisease, says Samuel Low, DDs, former president of the American Acasemy of Periodontology.
Power up: Use a high quality electric toothbrush wiuth a small head , says New York periodontisr, Greg Diamond, DDS : "The're optimized to remove plaque."
Go beyond Floss
If your gums recede (as even healthy gums can), interproximal brushes, which look like pipe cleaners, may worlk better than floss, which can miss plaque on a root.
Wait to bush
It takes 30 minutes for saliuva to newutralize the acids in foods. "Brushing righ after eating can brush the enamel away" Diamond warns.
Watch your gums
Insist that your dentist examine your gums with a probe. If the gum pocket surrounding a tooth is deeper than 3mm, you migh have gum disease, which, if untreated, can lead to the loss of the tooth.
Get off hte bottle
Many bottled waters lack fluoride. Consider adding a filter to your tap instead.
Wet your whistle
Teeth depend on saliva to remove microbes. if your mouth is dry, a prescription rinse, tablet, or chewing gum can help.

Raise Your Fluoride IQ Changes to fluoride levels in drinking water are stirring questions among the public. Dental hygienists can be the first to provide patients with fluoride facts and guidance.

The debate over drinking water fluoridation was reawakened last month when the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revised the recommended levels for fluoride in community drinking water for the first time in nearly 50 years. The EPA’s action touched off a vigorous exchange in the media between camps that support or oppose fluoridation. As this exchange filters out to patients, many will seek the counsel of dental hygienists.

Regardless of practice setting, oral health care professionals should be prepared to address patients’ concerns with evidence-based knowledge, as well as an awareness of how both positions are supported. This month’s Sunstar E-Brief examines the facts behind the EPA’s move, and offers insight into what drives arguments on both sides.

UP TO 41% OF TEENS AFFECTED

The revision to recommended fluoride levels was spurred by two important statistics about fluorosis (or spotting of teeth). Both figures appear in a National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) data brief dated November 2010.¹ The first shows that in a survey conducted from 1999 to 2004 dental fluorosis was present among 41% of adolescents ages 12 years to 15 years. In stark contrast, a survey conducted from 1986 to 1987 reveals that fluorosis in this same age group was 23%.

In short, the prevalence of fluorosis among adolescents rose 18% between 1986 and 2004. The same report also shows that children and teens are not the only groups affected by fluorosis.

GOVERNMENT’S NEXT STEP

The United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and EPA play different roles in carrying out water policy: HHS oversees the national water fluoridation plan, while the EPA is responsible for setting the legal, enforceable standard for parts of that plan—including fluoride levels for drinking water. The new level of fluoride HHS recommends is 0.7 milligrams per liter. The legal, enforceable standard for the maximum amount of fluoride allowed in drinking water is set by the EPA, and currently stands at 4.0 mg/L.

The HHS move to reduce the recommended level to 0.7 mg/L aims to maintain its benefits in preventing tooth decay and minimize risk of fluorosis.

The EPA has been collecting data since 1996 through a series of Six Year Reviews the agency is required to perform under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The reviews evaluate information, including data gathered by the National Research Council (NRC), that suggest whether a change in water regulations is warranted. After the first Six Year Review in 2003, the NRC submitted data about fluoride exposure to the EPA and recommended the agency update its fluoride risk assessment². In 2010, after completion of the second Six Year Review, the EPA again received new data. Both the EPA and HHS are monitoring the effects of the new drinking water standards to determine if additional measures should be taken in the future.

Since fluoridation levels for public drinking water were set in 1962 the availability of fluoride through sources other than drinking water has increased. Some of those sources include dental products such as toothpaste, mouth rinses and varnishes as well as professionally-applied fluoride treatment. Fluoride is also present in tea, gelatin and most seafood as well as food prepared in fluoridated water.

OPPOSITION TO FLUORIDATION

Though debate over fluoridation was renewed by the joint EPA/HHS announcement, it is not the first time calls have been made to rethink the practice of fluoridating drinking water. Rallies against use of fluoride reach back decades. Many critics argue it is not enough to reduce fluoridation levels, but that fluoridating public drinking water should be done away with entirely.

Some of the prevailing dissent among opponents is crystallized by the National Health Federation (thenhf.com). Describing itself as a “health freedom organization,” the group emphasizes the toxic potential of fluoride by pointing out the Food and Drug Administration regulates systemic fluoride as a prescription drug. The organization also says that toothpaste labeling that includes instructions to contact a poison control center “if more than a pea size amount [of fluoride] is swallowed” points to fluoride’s potential toxicity.

ALLIED FORCES FOR FLUORIDE

The American Dental Association (ADA) remains a staunch supporter of fluoridation, as reflected in a letter from the association to Prevention magazine that states, “Every day the media seems to pick up on a new ‘study’ that can scare the public.”³ The letter maintains that substantial scientific research exists to support fluoridation, and offers the ADA’s assurance that the benefits of community water fluoridation are well established. The ADA also notes its solidarity with the Centers for Disease Control and American Academy of Pediatrics in recognizing the benefits of water fluoridation in the prevention of dental decay.³

In a separate letter to the National Academy of Sciences’ Toxicological Risk of Fluoride in Drinking Water Project, the ADA seeks to dispel what it describes as misinformation provided by individuals connected to a number of EPA employees “who oppose community water fluoridation.”⁴ The letter notes that despite many attempts to establish a link between cancer and water fluoridation, all such attempts have “ultimately been rejected by the scientific community.”

The American Association of Public Health Dentistry (AAPHD) is lockstep with the ADA. One week after HHS announced it would lower the recommended level of fluoride to 0.7 mg/L, the AAPHD issued a statement lauding the revision. It also confirmed the AAPHD’s commitment to educate the public about the benefits of community water fluoridation.⁵

With strong opinion swirling around the government’s fluoridation policies, this is an ideal time for dental hygienists to locate and interpret dental literature that will strengthen their clinical knowledge. Patient awareness has been raised, and clinicians who understand both sides of the issue will be better able to deliver the educational component of dental hygiene care for which all in the profession are trained.

THIS ARTICLE IS REPROCED FROM SUNSTAR/BUTLER

We have just returned from attending continuing education courses at the Yankee Dental Congress in Boston. We are all returning to the office with new ideas and visions to improve our practice even further.

Our aim is to delivered the best care to our patients and to keep up to date with all technological advances in the field of dentistry.

The Cerec Single Visit Porcelain Restoration System is becoming more versatile and more and more dental practices are adapting this technology.

We are all looking forward to seeing you in our offie

To view this email as a web page, go here.

Dr. Oz Show on Dental X-rays, Oral Cancer Your patients may ask you about the safety of dental x-rays or ask questions about oral cancer screening adjunctives based on two nationally-syndicated TV segments on the Dr. Oz Show. Dental X-rays On Sept. 28, The Dr. Oz Show covered thyroid cancer and during a portion of the show, the host (Mehmet Oz, MD) said he was concerned whether the radiation patients receive from dental X-rays was a contributing factor in developing thyroid cancer. He then promoted the use of protective leaded aprons and thyroid collars to decrease radiation exposure, a practice the ADA recommends in The Selection of Patients for Dental Radiographic Examinations developed by the ADA and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. While the ADA believes the radiation exposure from dental X-rays is low relative to other sources, every precaution should be taken to ensure that radiation exposure is as low as reasonably possible. The ADA recommends that dentists use leaded aprons and leaded thyroid collars (or non-lead equivalents) whenever possible. This practice is strongly recommended for children, women of childbearing age and pregnant women who are especially susceptible to radiation effects. The ADA also recommends that dentists conduct a thorough clinical examination, consider the patient's history, review any prior X-rays, perform a caries risk assessment and consider both the dental and the general health needs of the patient prior to taking any X-rays. Oral Cancer Examinations and Adjunctive Screening Devices Oct. 1, The Dr. Oz Show will air a segment entitled, "A Trip to the Dentist Could Save Your Life," that will discuss oral cancer adjunctive screening devices. Earlier this year, the ADA provided the show's producers with a systematic review of oral cancer adjunctive screening devices published in the Journal of the American Dental Association . The ADA is often asked to provide information to the media but does not control its ultimate use. The systematic review is available here. Since that time, the ADA has published Evidence-Based Clinical Recommendations Regarding Screening for Oral Squamous Cell Carcinomas. During the upcoming ADA Annual Session in Orlando, a special forum on Oral Cancer and Oral Cancer Screening will be presented Oct. 9th, bringing together leading experts to consider the complex, clinically relevant issues and to share the latest developments in this area. Oral cancer examinations, which are a routine part of dental examinations and regular check-ups that include an examination of the entire mouth, are an important tool in the early detection of cancerous and pre-cancerous conditions in the mouth, according to the ADA. Here are some points that may be helpful to you in discussing both the use of X-rays and oral cancer examinations with your patients should they have questions: Dental X-rays Many oral diseases can't be detected on the basis of a visual and tactile examination alone. Dental X-ray exams are valuable in providing information about your oral health such as early stage cavities, gum diseases, abscesses or some types of tumors. X-rays can help dentists catch and treat oral health problems at an early stage. How often dental X-rays should be taken depends on your oral health condition, your age, your risk for disease and any signs and symptoms of oral disease you may be experiencing. Let's talk about what is right for you. The American Dental Association has information about dental X-rays on its Web site at ADA.org if you would like more information. Oral Cancer People can get lesions, sores or spots in their mouths for a variety of reasons and many times these sores go away on their own and pose no problem. However, if you have a sore or spot in your mouth that has been there for more than two weeks, it's important that it be evaluated. As your dentist, I routinely screen you for oral cancer by carefully examining your mouth, tongue and neck. If I find anything suspicious, I may refer you directly to an oral surgeon or physician for further evaluation or I may screen any suspicious spot or sore in my office (describe the adjunctive screening device you may use). If I conduct a screening in my office, it can help me determine whether a referral is indicated. The screening I conduct in my office is just a screening... not a definite diagnosis... only a surgical biopsy can confirm if a lesion, spot or sore is oral cancer. The best way to prevent oral cancer is to avoid risky behaviors including tobacco and alcohol use. For more information on oral cancer, visit the American Dental Association's Web site at ADA.org and the Journal of the American Dental Association patient page on detecting oral cancer early here. ADA.org Links ADA News Today Oral HealthTopics Events & Meetings ADA Advocacy ADA Catalog Add us to your address book Update your preferences Subscription Center

This email was sent to: bobdent1@verizon.net This email was sent by: American Dental Association 211 East Chicago Avenue Chicago, IL 60611 USA We respect your right to privacy - view our policy and terms.
To unsubscribe from this e-mail publication, click here.
Manage Subscriptions | Update Profile

ADA: American Dental Association - Capitol Hill event honors oral health advocates

ADA: American Dental Association - Capitol Hill event honors oral health advocates

To view this email as a web page, go here.

Medical Journal Publishes Article on BPA and Dental Materials An article about bisphenol A and dental materials published in the medical journal Pediatrics received widespread media coverage. See stories by USA Today and MSNBC which quote an ADA spokesperson. ADA News has a brief story about the article and the Council on Scientific Affairs' statement on BPA is also available on ADA.org. Dental materials with bis-GMA and/or bis-DMA may contain trace amounts of BPA as a byproduct of the manufacturing process. Additionally, according to the Pediatrics article, resin-based dental materials containing bis-DMA can break down into BPA after coming in contact with enzymes in saliva, but materials made with bis-GMA do not undergo this reaction. Most FDA approved dental materials are made with bis-GMA. If you are unsure if the materials you use contain bis-DMA or bis-GMA, refer to the MSDS or your dental supply company. BPA from dental sealants may be detected in saliva in minute amounts. How much, if any, BPA is absorbed by the body and whether that has an effect on human health is not known. BPA can be detected for up to three hours after sealants are placed, then levels quickly drop off. According to the authors of the article, the benefits of dental sealants outweigh the potential risk of a brief BPA exposure. Dental materials are far less likely to cause BPA exposure than other consumer goods such as plastic bottles and linings of metal cans. While the ADA believes that the current evidence does not indicate a health risk related to the use of resin-based sealants and composites, if your patients ask if there are "BPA free" sealants, you can discuss glass ionomers; however, ionomers are less effective in caries prevention than resin-based sealants, as noted in the evidence-based clinical recommendations on pit and fissure sealants ADA.org/3135.aspx. Based on the recent news coverage of dental materials and BPA, your patients may ask you about the safety and effectiveness of dental materials. Below are some points that may be helpful in discussing this issue with your patients: Dental sealants and composites have been used for many years. Sealants prevent tooth decay and composites are tooth colored dental fillings. Resin-based sealants and composites are made from plastic. Some types of plastic have been in the news lately because of a chemical called BPA, a chemical that acts like estrogen. Some studies with laboratory animals suggest a disruption in normal hormone activity. This has led to speculation about the effect of BPA on humans. An article that was just published in a medical journal assessed various existing studies on dental materials and BPA. A low level of BPA may be present in the saliva a few hours after placement of resin-based sealants, but based on current evidence, the American Dental Association believes that this low level and brief exposure time poses no known health risk. Trace amounts of BPA may be present as a byproduct of the manufacturing process or with certain sealants (those with bis DMA) after coming in contact with enzymes in saliva. The one-time exposure to BPA from sealants is about 200 times lower than the daily level EPA considers safe. Dental materials are far less likely to cause BPA exposure than other consumer goods such as plastic bottles and linings of metal cans. The researchers say sealants and composites should continue to be used because of their proven benefits which outweigh potential risks of BPA. The researchers also say that BPA exposure can be reduced if a newly-placed sealant or composite filling is rinsed or wiped. I have composite dental fillings, and my children have had dental sealants. [if this is true, you may want to mention this to your patients]. As your dentist, I want to answer any questions you may have about your dental treatment. You can also visit the American Dental Association's Web site at ADA.org for more information. Here are links to copyright-free Journal of the American Dental Association patient pages on dental sealants and tooth colored fillings that you can download, copy and distribute to your patients: Sealants Tooth colored fillings ADA.org Links ADA News Today Oral HealthTopics Events & Meetings ADA Advocacy ADA Catalog Add us to your address book Update your preferences Subscription Center

This email was sent to: bobdent1@verizon.net This email was sent by: American Dental Association 211 East Chicago Avenue Chicago, IL 60611 USA We respect your right to privacy - view our policy and terms.
To unsubscribe from this e-mail publication, click here.
Manage Subscriptions | Update Profile