New dental tech that delivers enormous doses of radiation
This sounds familiar...
A new technology is introduced. It's hailed as a great leap forward. It's embraced by the mainstream. Then a few years down the line, problems start to become apparent. Watchdogs call for greater oversight. But by then too much time and money has been invested. The new technology is here to stay.
That's sort of how it's shaping up with cone-beam CT scans--a revolutionary dental imaging technique.
On a website that provides information about cone beam technology (conebeam.com), you'll find this bold statement at the top of the home page: "CBCT FOR EVERYONE"
That's a stunning statement. Because it's a really REALLY bad idea.
Dangerous fun
Dentists tend to like CBCT. It creates crisp 3-D images of the jaw and teeth, including roots--very useful for complex problems like impacted teeth and braces.
And kids actually like CT scan too because of what one orthodontist calls the "wow factor." On the computer display, kids can see their entire skull in vibrant colors.
As the orthodontist told the New York Times: "Fun for the kids."
Fun...but dangerous.
A Times investigation reveals that this ingenious scanning method emits a massive radiation dose--much more radiation than a conventional x-ray. And it could be a huge risk for kids, because children--especially adolescents--are much more vulnerable to the effects of radiation than adults.
The enhanced detail of a CT scan image is helpful for orthodontists. But over the course of braces maintenance, patients usually get several scans. And unfortunately, scientists believe the effects of these powerful scans are cumulative. So the long-term risk of cancer is doubled after the second scan, tripled after the third, etc.
Now...here's what's infuriating: Orthodontists and dentists can also produce 3-D images with a digital camera that emits no radiation. But using the digital camera takes about a half-hour longer than the CT scan. And those half-hours add up, preventing orthodontists from booking higher numbers of patients each day.
Fueled by misinformation
But there's one more detail about dental CT scans that actually goes WAY beyond infuriating. (My dentist would NOT be happy with me right now because I'm actually grinding my teeth as I write this.)
The selling of cone-beam CT technology has been outright dishonest.
In an online lecture earlier this year, a prominent 3-D technology expert who gives frequent professional presentations told attendees that the CT scan produces no more radiation than airport full-body scans.
But the director of the Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University Medical Center told the Times that such an estimate is "very wrong--by a lot." In fact, he says CT scanners can be SEVERAL HUNDRED TIMES more powerful than those controversial airport scanners.
Unfortunately, this wildly misleading "estimate" is fairly popular.
According to the Times, a recent issue of the Journal of the American Dental Association ran a "favorable article" by an author who has stated that radiation from a CT scan is equal to--yep--an airport full-body scan.
Funny thing though: That entire JADA issue was devoted to cone-beam technology. In fact, the issue was actually underwritten by one of the leading makers of CT scanners.
Arrrgh! The dental mainstream is just as bad as the medical mainstream!
Here's how the Times sums it up: "The cone beam's popularity has been fueled in part by misinformation about its safety and efficacy."
"Misinformation?" That's a tactful way of saying what it really is: lies.
Please warn your friends and family about this travesty--especially those who have kids who may soon be headed to their first orthodontist appointment. But this warning is for everyone--not just kids. The next time your dentist needs to x-ray your teeth, ask him what technology he's using.
If he says, "cone-beam," tell him you don't mind taking the extra half-hour for the digital camera--or that you're willing to skip the special effects altogether.
Printer-friendly versionAbout the author
Jenny Thompson is the Director of the Health Sciences Institute and editor of the HSI e-Alert. Through HSI, she and her team uncover important health information and expose ridiculous health misinformation, most notably through the HSI e-Alert.
Visit www.hsionline.com to sign up for the free HSI e-Alert.
OUTRAGE!! Billion-dollar drug company hides astounding discovery of a natural cancer killer.10,000 times stronger than chemo--but without the side effects!
Click here to read the full story of this astounding breakthrough…
Email this Article
Comments
Marten
Today most of Dentist are like the'' MD'' Meaning ,''Medicine Dispenser''
Steve S.
Now I feel even worse. Last week I had one of these cone x-rays from a periodontist for a tooth implant. I thought I was just getting my bill padded with the full mouth 3D scan, when the doctor looks at the finished x-ray and pulls out a caliper and say's "it looks like there's plenty of bone to put the implant in." Only to then reassure himself with nitrile gloves on, followed up by some squeezing, compressing and pinching the gum against the bone in the vacant tooth area. Just a week prior to this visit with the periodontist, my regular dentist also said I had plenty of bone for the implant with just a single x-ray.
So now I just paid part of a $2,000 out-of-pocket fee, to get a radioactive mega-dose.
More ADA lies just like amalgam(mercury) fillings.
Anonymous
You write about that which you know very little.
Dr. R, DDS
This article is about as short-sighted at one can be.
First, conebeam SHOULD be used judiciously. When done so, it provides VALUABLE information that IMPROVES your health.
Second, there are SEVERAL DIFFERENT VERSIONS of conebeam. So, to lump them all together IS THE LIE.
Third, dosage is related to the site being evaluated. A small view scan is the equivalent of 4 conventional bitewing xrays- that of a routine examination. I don't know anywhere that claims it is the same as a routine dental xray.
Fourth, show me a "digital camera" that can look through bone. It doesn't exist. Anything that takes one-half hour to expose is worthless, even if it did exist. How about this for instruction: "We're going to take a picture of your mouth, but dont move, don't even breathe, for 30 minutes because it will be blurry and we will need to start over." What a joke.
The only misinformation out there is in THIS article. Jenny Thompson, do you homework. Not all information is comprehendable on the surface. Ask a simple question for a complex process, and you get this kind of "journalism."
Anonymous
If your general dentist sent you to a periodontist for the implant its because he knows more about implants than the general dentist does. Since he doesn't feel confident in his abilities to place the implant himself, do you think he is really qualified to make the call if there is enough bone? There are a lot of scare tactics regarding radiation. Here are a few fun questions that you and the author should answer for yourselves. How much radiation does it take to cause actual damage? How much ambient radiation are you exposed to daily, just from your normal life? Does taking a cone beam scan change your averaged daily radiation? Does going in the sun? Drinking water? Has anybody ever been harmed by a dental x-ray? What about the sun? What is the magnitude of difference between a dental x-ray, a cone beam, and a medical cat scan? It is empowering to be informed. Enjoy.
Lori
It's very safe to use "anonymous" when criticizing the author of an article. Come on - use your name and tell us why you don't agree. We can all learn from each other. I don't always agree either, but I state my case and use my name.
bhabas
Just wait until the person placing the implant enters into the mandibular canal. You may rethink holding your "special effects" then. To Steve S, you should not feel bad in the slightest for taking a CBCT before implant placement. It is the standard of care and I would not ever have one placed without its tremendous aid to a knowledgeable clinician. The problem with these articles is that they are written by someone who knows a little about everything and has a deadline to meet. If you want to avoid radiation, stay out of the sun! Most dental CBCTs (Kodak I know for sure) are similar in radiation dose to about 3 periapical radiographs.
PS. I love the disclaimer at the bottom, "informational purposes only". If it is not meant as medical advice, why write it as such Ms. Thompson? Do a little research at least before spreading this misinformation to the masses. What a disservice! At least you got paid for your lies!
Post new comment