IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

Any comments on this explanation for allergy? (yes, of course :)

Hans Lennros hans.lennros at swipnet.se
Fri Jun 18 12:15:08 EST 1999

Hi Zugumba,

You wrote:
>Actually, Joel is perfectly correct as far as things go in the US.

You think he never sent a patient with a cold home to avoid catching it?

>dentist can lose his license for treating a systemic illness

What is really a systemic illness. Is that a disease that hits all systems
in the body or ' just ' a local condition with systemic (general) symptoms?
Or even one, or a few, distant symptoms? What is it really?

In most cases it is the latter. And as dentists, even in the States, we
cannot avoid affecting the body conditons when treating mouth conditions.
The mouth IS a part of the body. And in many cases also the body's mirror.

>If Joel determined that a patient was suffering from a migraine and not a
>dental abscess, his job stops there.  He then is obligated to refer the
>patient to a neurologist.

Okay, Let's say it is rather diffuse oro-facial pain. What would you do?

>Similarly, removing amalgam restorations to treat a systemic illness
>(like multiple sclerosis) is considering treating an illness out of the
>scope of dental practice.

What you really are talking about is indications. Id est; for what purpose
the dental treatment is performed. Sofar teeth are treated for the reason
of teeth, yes. One day (and it is emerging) dentists will learn that what
they do to one part of the body may effect other parts. I am not saying
that dental amalgam is the sole cause of MS. There are far closer relations
between classical systemic diseases and dental treatment, for exaple;
an aggrevated heart condition due to dental treatment, increased arterio-
sclerotic plaque formation, etc (not to mention all the iatrogenous TMJ:s)

>After a certain point the patient has to be turned over to the correct
>medical practitioners to finish the job or to follow-up.

That's a pretty obvious statement. Anyone would agree with that. And
it doesn't disprove what I wrote.

>True, the line can be fuzzy, but most of the time it is pretty
>clear what range of ailments a dentist in the US can treat

Submandibular lymphatic adenitis? May a dentist treat that - or not? In US?


More information about the Toxicol mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net