Posted by stjames on May 8, 2003, at 16:55:49
In reply to For StJames » stjames, posted by mattdds on May 8, 2003, at 15:20:21
> But 100 amalgam fillings? I am not sure how this would be possible! Personally, if I saw a patient with that much decay I would have planned for crowns, hands down. This would have eliminated any problems you personally had with amalgam at the same time.
No decay, 100 is my best guess, as I remember
the doc finding 6 cavities every 6 months, ie 12X10 = ~100. My mother indicated she felt the
doc was a little over zelous in filling things
but later in life I had a consult with an Oral
Surgeon who indicated I had excellent care.
I do not think these were grooves as most were demonstrated by X-ray.
> >>With hind sight, what would of been a better option for a kid who has 6 cavities every 6 months, for over 10 years ?
>
> One word: Sealants!Did they have those in the 70's ? I know kids get them today.
> My question for you is this: Are you getting the amalgams replaced because they are defective or have recurrent decay? Or are you replacing them because you are worried about the mercury load? If it is the former, than you will likely need some crowns or onlays, if you have as many fillings as you say. If it is the latter, than my suggestion is “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!”, and you know my position on whether amalgam causes disease.I HAVE NO DECAY !!!! Far too much money was put into my mouth and I am also a tooth snob, so my teeth are well cared for (heheh)
NO, I have no intention of removing the amalgams.
I grind too much for other options & am not convinced there is an issue here. (Remember Matt, I am the one who said this is a qwack)
poster:stjames
thread:223248
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20030505/msgs/225199.html