 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Dentistry / April 2006Alternate site
Dear patient or lay-person searching this news group for answers to dental and/ or TMD questions. As you no doubt have already noticed, this site is obscured by trolls trying to fabricate issues about toxicity levels and diseases which do not exist. For years, the dentists who have participated on this news group have tried to debate these trolls scientifically, tried to argue with them or just tried to ignore these posters. Unfortunately, these trolls have chosen to continue their barrage of attacks against science and proven methods of legitimate dental care. Finally, this group of dentists and ancillary personnel, have chosen to simply go away. The down side of this is that a lot of good people are left with their legitimate questions and concerns un-answered. As a group, we [the regular posters from this news group] have been discussing how to fill the void left by the absence of virtually all dental professionals from this news group. After thorough discussion, we have chosen to open a separate internet forum for people to ask questions, debate dental science, review techniques, learn about regulatory issues, etc. We have created this forum at: www.scimeddentistry.com/smd We welcome anyone to come to this site and discuss dental topics and concerns. To avoid flame wars and abuse to anyone posting to the site, there is a group of moderators on the site who will remove any poster who is rude, abusive, vulgar, or posts unwanted advertisements for other sites. Spam will not be tolerated, nor will any Troll-type behavior. Participating in the site still allows anonymity, but requires a valid email address. There is a log-in process where you register and receive a confirmation email back prior to gaining access to the site. This is only to enable us to eliminate those posters who are abusive to the group. No information about any poster is collected, no information is being sold or distributed to others. A cookie is utilized only to enable the registration process and subsequent log-ins. Since the site has started, 130 members have joined. Please be patient if it takes a few hours (or more) to get replies to your questions. Please understand that the regulars who volunteer to be available at this site do so as volunteers only. We receive no compensation beyond the opportunity to discuss our favorite topics with interested people. No one is getting paid to be there, and we all have lives outside of the internet. Although at times, that may seem hard to believe. Please register on the site, obtain your email confirmation, and initiate or join in on some discussion. Or, if you prefer, do your best to get the information you desire from the open news group (which does have some advantages). Sincerely, Amatus Cremona Actually its been a pretty decent discussion board right here .... but thanks anyway! Joel Amatus Cremona Wrote: > Dear patient or lay-person searching this news group for answers t > dental [quoted text clipped - 75 lines] > > Amatus Cremon -- Joel34 Thanks for the invite, but I kind-of like the good dentists and peopl right here. Nobody here has to worry about being censored, deleted, banned or chased away by thugs We can post here without gettting yelled at, threatened, played o ridiculed Glad things are working out so well for you all. Stop by anytime. -Su -- Su "Thanks for the invite, but I kind-of like the good dentists and people right here. Nobody here has to worry about being censored, deleted, banned or chased away by thugs. "We can post here without gettting yelled at, threatened, played or ridiculed. "Glad things are working out so well for you all. Stop by anytime." _____________________________________ Sue, As an observer of this forum as well as other dental forums on the Internet for many years, I can say that any dentists who post HERE are far more subject to rude and insulting behavior, as well as personal attacks, than on ANY other sites -- bar none. Just look at what Dr. Braces has had to endure this past week! Although it doesn't bother hard-nosed, old-time participants like me or Steve or Joel, because we recognize the powerlessness of the insulting posters for what it is, most people don't return to places where they are attacked and insulted. Although I know that you experienced an unfortunate conflict with just a couple of individuals here on SMD, the majority of the dentists and other posters here did not have any such conflict with you and got along just fine, as we continue to do today! I know that I have read and enjoyed your messages for quite a while. No problems here. But the fact remains that there are indeed, many non-dentists who post here who are abusive and intolerant of any viewpoint but their own particular quirks. Much of what they post is just plain ignorant, but they don't care. Over the last twelve years that I have participated here on SMD, there have been literally hundreds of very accomplished, scientifically educated dentists and other health professionals who have contributed their knowledge to other members of the professions and members of the public. Most of them are now gone. Only a handful of dentists remain here. Why? Because most dentists were abused, attacked, and insulted by the same, little hardcore group of crazies that has plagued this NG off and on for many years. When this newsgroup started, the Internet was in its infancy, and SMD here was just about the ONLY means of rapid, personal, worldwide electronic news and commentary distribution. But that has greatly changed! Today, there are literally thousands of dentists on sites like the Internet Dental Forum and Dentaltown, as well as the newer scimeddentistry.com. There are VERY lively debates on all issues in dentistry -- and such sites show a wide variation of opinions by a number of posting dentists. These issues are debated daily. Such popular sites, however, adhere to civilized rules of discourse. The vivid insults and ad hominem attacks that plague THIS forum just don't show up on most discussions on those other, more popular forums. There, the discussions center on science and on clinical results, rather than on political grandstanding and self-puffery. On those other sites, dentists freely discuss their personal successes and frustrations with the many different methods of dental treatment and of newer dental materials and equipment. But not here. On those other sites, leading researchers and inventive developers of dental products and materials discuss their work and all the pros and cons of new methods. But not here. That's because the behavior of our all-too-familiar non-dentist "attack gang" is more reminiscent of a teenage chat room than of a mature discussion of professional clinical issues. People gravitate toward decency, and away from ignorance and rudeness. That's why so many dentists left. Fortunately, there are still several dentists who frequent this forum despite the presence of the crazies. Those of us who have been here for a decade or so, have developed ways of separating the wheat from the chaff. For me, it's like sorting though all the junk mail that arrives in the US Mail box each day. I attend to the important mail, and sometimes browse through the junk mail, and even answer some junk mail when it piques my interest. But it's important to remember that junk mail is still junk mail. I still encourage other dentists to participate in this newsgroup, and remind them that the little group of crazies generally have no credibility ITRW (In The Real World), so there's no need to pretend that they have any particular standing on the internet either. But again, most people (and dentists are people too) prefer to participate in forums where the normal standards of human decency are the rule of the day. That's why you find THOUSANDS on other forums and what -- maybe a dozen? -- here. I've been here for twelve years and I'm not going away (unless my computer breaks!), and I will continue to read your posts with interest. Some members of the public who are in real need of dental advice will still come here. Such people can still be helped with free, reasonable advice from a real dentist, as Steve amply demonstrates. I'd hate to see them subjected only to the personal agendas of some Internet propagandists instead. The scimeddentistry.com site offers members of the public access to advice of a number of experienced, respected dental clinicians. It's one site where the conversation can focus on clinical dentistry instead of on political agendas. I look forward to reading your posts in the future and I hope you stay around for a long time! Thanks, - dentaldoc > As an observer of this forum as well as other dental forums on the > Internet for many years, I can say that any dentists who post HERE are > far more subject to rude and insulting behavior, as well as personal > attacks, than on ANY other sites -- bar none. The dentists who posted here were the rudist. Care to go back in the archives? > Just look at what Dr. Braces has had to endure this past week! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > their knowledge to other members of the professions and members of the > public. The fact is many anti-amalgists like Hans lenros adn Madbia have left, but you don't decry them being harassed or pushed of SMD by the pro-amalgamists. Also many anti-amalgam dentist do not post here because they are so intimidated into making themselves targets of "investigations" by state dental boards, funded by taxpayers by the way. Funny that doesn't seems to bother you. > Most of them are now gone. Only a handful of dentists remain here. > > Why? Because most dentists were abused, attacked, and insulted by the > same, little hardcore group of crazies that has plagued this NG off and > on for many years. You use the word abuse and then use the word crazy. Listen pal I have the scans to show my jaw was screwed up by amalgam and even some dentists here have seen that. you've no right to call someone crazy (whether you are or not, I'll assum for the sake or argument and this post you are) when I see many amalgam lawsuits in progress on Pacer and 1000's of adverse reaction reports thrown out at the FdA ( by dentists). Amalgam never was proved to be safe but grandfathtered (backdoored) by the FDA. Many DENTISTS (probably dozens) have sued the ADA over amalgam, but do they post here? You ignore ALL the sceince behind amalgam and then attack people you and your self-centered dental buddies poisioned with shilt materials in the first place. Who ever tested high-copper gamma2's for long term corrosion anyway? All people like you and the other dentist care about is YOURSELF. It's me me me, how was I offended, how are our letting chat sessions being inconvienced by a pesking thing like science and studies documenting harm from amalgam. Your like a big brat with the equivalent scientific understanding. It's all about you isnt't it? And to heck with that patient who trusted you and the safety of amalgam. And you sit in on dental board meetings and your still propagate this scientific garbage on the internet? > Today, there are literally thousands of dentists on sites like the > Internet Dental Forum and Dentaltown, as well as the newer [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > The vivid insults and ad hominem attacks that plague THIS forum just > don't show up on most discussions on those other, more popular forums. They are also censored. Why is that? Create all the censored "happy face" forums your want, but when you step into SMD you'll be hit with reality, patients have and are being posiioned by amalgam. As soon as some patients leave others replace them. DAMS has 1000's of members. Go to any PUBLIC uncensorned forum and you'll find the Dentist , patients and amalgam victims who are strong anti-amalgamists. > There, the discussions center on science and on clinical results, > rather than on political grandstanding and self-puffery. Your a hypocritice. Me and others have attempted scientific discussion with dentists for years. Your the one who resorts to political grandstanding using broad terms like "proven methods" and insinuating that only "experts" should be able to speak without showing any proof amalgam is safe or discussing material properties or research in ANY depth whatsoever.. When that fails you and other dentist step in the gutter REAL quick, using terms like crazy, nutty and even "fancypants". If you don't have the brains to defent what you do, at least have the courtesy and deceny to step aside without making personal attacks. hey your the professional wading around in the gutter with the namecalling. Most non-dentist amalgam victims do not post here professionally. But in you zeal to defend the undefensible you still somehow always end up wallowing in the gutter with the name calling. And by the way I thought Steve Manusco , who know calls himself Amatues was really out of line to call me "fancy pants" when I was talking about amalgam, because, not only is the label wildly incorrect (as anyone who knows me knows), but ironically, the dentist who posioned me was gay (unbeknownst to the community) and i could have used all kind of slanderous derogartory terms over the years on SMD. But you know what. Besides that being inappropriate and irrelvant bigotry (except the fact of practicing while impaired with Aids) , I have something you and Manusco don't, that class and honesty and a SCIENTIFIC point to make about amalgams. I will give you credity for using your real name though, unlikely the cowardly Manusco. > On those other sites, dentists freely discuss their personal successes > and frustrations with the many different methods of dental treatment > and of newer dental materials and equipment. > > But not here. Oh dear, did us Hg posioned patients inconvncie you with REAL scientific questions instead of letting you chat away happily in your censored dental country clubs? > On those other sites, leading researchers and inventive developers of > dental products and materials discuss their work and all the pros and > cons of new methods. > > But not here. Who's fault is that? Fact is many developers of dental products such as imaging software post here. At any rate I didn't see this profusion of technologicl disucssion when there was a gateway to dentaltown. > That's because the behavior of our all-too-familiar non-dentist "attack > gang" is more reminiscent of a teenage chat room than of a mature > discussion of professional clinical issues. People gravitate toward > decency, and away from ignorance and rudeness. > > That's why so many dentists left. More hypocrisy. There were only 5 dentist posting here regularly Manusco,fawks, Caberill, WB and Tony bad (and Bornfeld and Joel). Vasserman still posts and Stovepipe left a long time ago. Many were as abusive as hell and never added anything of any real techincal merit. > Fortunately, there are still several dentists who frequent this forum > despite the presence of the crazies. Again you show what a hyocrit you are. you call people you posion "crazy" and then claim to take the highground. You an igornant not nice person who used whatever godgiven fortune you were given to influence or sit in on CA dental board meetings to subtley undermine dentist that didn't agree with you and patients who report the truth on the internet. Your obviously too lazy to even rent a Jermoe meter or do any real research. What, do you SPEAK for the ADA now? CARe to actually take a stand on something? And your really the one who is crazy becaue anyone can take a Jerome meter and stick in there mouth and meaure the Hg. even manufacutrere admit IN COURT THAT AMALGAM PLACED IN A WET FIELD CAN CORROD SEVERLY. But your EGO is so HUGE that you have to be the good guy at all costs even if it means stomping on victims of your dental organiztions. That says more about you as a person than anything i or any other "crazy' who posts ever could. AND My main question on SMD still stands if you hav the balls to answer it. Write out a statement here on SMD stating the highest amound of Hg releaed in an adult , child or Fetus by an ADA approved filling in the US today over say a years time and put your John Hancock at the bottom. What's the matter? Arent you the Honest , taking he high road-,friendly to the public, smiling, nothing to hide "dental expert"? You CANNOt do that. You would NEVER do THAT. Despite all your sick gratutious attacks on victims of your profession and a bill to ban amlgam in CONGRESS. Because you still have patients and don't want to give them a legal basis for accusing you of fraud by publicly assuring us in writing that amlgam is always safe? You'll NEVER answer a straight question or take ANY PERSONAl RESPONSABILItrY for your professional view which affect million becasue your well aware that the standard of "I don't care" gives you a blank check to do and say what you want with amalgam if you don't mess it up. Your self-centered and dishonest and a scientific wimp, that is what you really are. cz Dear Clinton, Yesterday I wrote, "> As an observer of this forum as well as other dental forums on the > Internet for many years, I can say that any dentists who post HERE are > far more subject to rude and insulting behavior, as well as personal > attacks, than on ANY other sites -- bar none." Thanks, Clinton, for taking the time to prove my point! Regards, - dentaldoc > Dear Clinton, > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Thanks, Clinton, for taking the time to prove my point! I guess the only real "authority" you can quote to support your postiion is yourself? See what I mean about the ego? (by the way how about setting an upper limit on Hg release from amalgam since you've evaded that question yet again). I even prepared a statement you could sign if you like to quote yourself so much. EXPRESS GUARANTEE AND STATEMENT OF AMALGAM SAFETY: I Dr. Bill, being an expert on amalgam and recognized authority on the subject as well as expiernced consultant to the CA dental board, do guarantee to my patients that any amalgam placed by me over any time period will give off no more than (fill in the blank) ug of Hg and generate no more than (fill in the blank) ug of mehtyl Hg, as a result of any factor including product defects, galvansim, crevice corrosion, acidic enzyamatic action faulty condensation or placement in a wet field etc. Furthermore, since I'm such an honest straighforward person, if any questions aris on this issue i expressly waive my right to defend myself based on the standard of care doctrine and let only proof of amalgam toxicity or lack of proof be the determing factor in regard to any liability I have on this issue. This is my express gurantee for the safety and non-toxcity of the amalgam I place Signed Sincerely, Dr. Bill. > Over the last twelve years that I have participated here on SMD, there > have been literally hundreds of very accomplished, scientifically > educated dentists and other health professionals who have contributed > their knowledge to other members of the professions and members of the > public. PS- want a bunch of hyperbole. I can count the numbr of regulars here in the past year on one hand and the number with scientiic competence and honesty on one finger. Also, just another obersvation, It is amazing how you act so offended that an anymous dentist ("dr. Braces) has been offended, yet think nothing of attacking non-anyonous posters as if an anymous dentist is "worth more" than an amalgam victim. Bill Wrote: > Sue > [quoted text clipped - 111 lines] > Thanks, > - dentaldoc Bill, I don't think anyone likes being attacked. Is it possible to ignore these topics (amalgams, etc.)? Is there not a feature where you can turn off the people that you do not wish to read? BTW, when the new forum was formed, I was told by a non-dentist old time SMDer that none of the SMD dentists could stand me and that I was the reason why they left. He also made it clear that that I am not welcome on the new forum. Thus I am here. Thanks for accepting me. Thank you more for answering patient questions. I'm glad you decided to stick around. Sincerely, Sue  SignatureSue "Bill, "I don't think anyone likes being attacked. Is it possible to ignore these topics (amalgams, etc.)? Is there not a feature where you can turn off the people that you do not wish to read?" _________________________________ Sue, Yes, there certainly is, and no doubt some people use it. But when I speak with other dentists and tell them about this newsgroup, those who have seen it simply prefer to go to the larger, well-attended dental forums where they can discuss in detail the latest subjects. On other forums, for example, you can learn about the latest advances in dental ceramics and their application in Cercon and Lava crowns and bridges. You can hear from dentists with a great deal of experience in placing those newer materials, and obtain insights into the fine points of their use. This can help a dentist avoid problems that others have experienced, and that greatly benefits the next patient. Try learning about bonding and prep design specifically for Lava crowns here, and you'll find nothing. No help. So the dentist will go to the forum that actually has a discussion that addresses the Lava process. There he will find page after page of information, and discussions with dozens of dentists who are actually using the Lava crowns. Speaking of the amalgam subject, I'm sure you've seen Clinton's rambling response to my message yesterday. He takes umbrage at my reference to "crazies," which is odd, unless he thinks he is one. I certainly didn't say he was. It's also odd that he goes on and on about amalgam -- but my entire message didn't even mention amalgams! Yet he makes that the focus of his tirade, while never missing an opportunity to hurl insults at me. That's what chases so many people away from this forum. Nobody wants insults -- particularly when other forums routinely host widely opposing positions in a decent atmosphere. The funny thing is that Clinton doesn't have a clue WHAT my opinions are about amalgam, or even whether I use the material -- or not. ___________________________________________ "BTW, when the new forum was formed, I was told by a non-dentist old time SMDer that none of the SMD dentists could stand me and that I was the reason why they left. He also made it clear that that I am not welcome on the new forum." No doubt that there are a couple such persons, but certainly that doesn't apply to all. I am an old-time SMDer myself and I know that isn't true for me. Of course if the new forum moderator is one of those couple of people, that would make it tough to get on. ______________________________ "Thus I am here. "Thanks for accepting me. Thank you more for answering patient questions. "I'm glad you decided to stick around. "Sincerely, Sue" _____________________________________ Sue, I'm glad you're here too, and that you decided to stick around. I hope to keep reading your messages! Best regards, - dentaldoc Bill Wrote: > "Bill > [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > Best regards > - dentaldoc Bill Clinton is angry and blames dentists. He is lashing out. Let hi comments go. He is only trying to get a reaction As far as the other forum goes, I have no desire to check it out. I d not need toxic people in my life, whether it be 1, 2 or 50. They have made their new home to enjoy. I hope they make it a home ENJOY IT. This place (SMD) is still open to the public as well as denta professionals. I can be myself here without anyone kicking me out. Take Care Su -- Su > Clinton is angry and blames dentists. He is lashing out. Let his > comments go. He is only trying to get a reaction. Perhaps so! Probably posting here is a waste of time anway. No one ever changes their view anyway. > As far as the other forum goes, I have no desire to check it out. I do > not need toxic people in my life, whether it be 1, 2 or 50. I haven't "checked out" that forum either. But you can get an anymous Id and post. (I already posted who to disable the cookies in your computer so you can't be identified when you log in). > They have made their new home to enjoy. I hope they make it a home & > ENJOY IT. > > This place (SMD) is still open to the public as well as dental > professionals. I can be myself here without anyone kicking me out. I think whoever told you , what you said, was lying. Talk about me taking things personally. I.E. it is obvious that what the handful of dentists did had nothing to do with you, nor would they care, I would think if you posted there. > Clinton is angry and blames dentists. He is lashing out. Let his > comments go. He is only trying to get a reaction. Yeah, your right! You seem to be one of the brainer posters here! (If what you said in you other post were true, perhaps that what intimidates the other dentists. I.e brainy women) Anyway I certainly don't blame all dentists since many people are to blame for the use of amalgam. The dentist who placed my amalgam is dead now. that means I cannot get any 'justice" in that sense, although I happen to see in lawyers NG that you can sue a dead person and garnish their gravesite. (Don't think after what I have been though the thought hasn't crossed my mind). > As far as the other forum goes, I have no desire to check it out. I do > not need toxic people in my life, whether it be 1, 2 or 50. People who use toxic materials are toxic! Clinton Wrote: > > Clinton is angry and blames dentists. He is lashing out. Let his > > comments go. He is only trying to get a reaction. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > People who use toxic materials are toxic! Clinton, I am sorry for what happened to you. However I don't think that yelling and screaming on this Usenet will change the laws. You may get more individual attention when you bash and call names, however it is the wrong kind of attention, IMO. After awhile, everyone here (both sides) turn a deaf ear to the science, or ignore the entire thread as it only seems to become a personal ax to grind between individuals. The cause becomes lost. Maybe getting involved in organizations (with others that support your views) and working with and through them, would be more beneficial? Maybe using this Usenet as a place to make friends instead of enemies may be more beneficial too. Personally, I do not know if you were posioned, but you have a right to your own beliefs about that. JMHO. Sue SignatureSue > Clinton Wrote: > > I am sorry for what happened to you. However I don't think that yelling > and screaming on this Usenet will change the laws. I don't know if has any impact either. I know a lot of amalgam victims do not post here so maybe they feel the same way > You may get more > individual attention when you bash and call names, however it is the > wrong kind of attention, IMO. I'm more interested in seeing what the dentists thought process is. So far I've been very surprised by what I found. > After awhile, everyone here (both sides) turn a deaf ear to the > science, or ignore the entire thread as it only seems to become a > personal ax to grind between individuals. True but keep in mind that Dentists repeatedly make posts which can be proven to be in error about amalgam. > Maybe getting involved in organizations (with others that support your > views) and working with and through them, would be more beneficial? > > Maybe using this Usenet as a place to make friends instead of enemies > may be more beneficial too. I see usenet more as a place to exchange ideas than make friends. It's true that two differnet groups of people post on sci.dental, those who want to debate certain scientific issues and those who are more interested in socializing. Difficult to predict what will happen when these two groups meet on the newsgroup. > "Bill, > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > have seen it simply prefer to go to the larger, well-attended dental > forums where they can discuss in detail the latest subjects. That are censored > On other forums, for example, you can learn about the latest advances > in dental ceramics and their application in Cercon and Lava crowns and > bridges. You can hear from dentists with a great deal of experience in > placing those newer materials, and obtain insights into the fine points > of their use. This can help a dentist avoid problems that others have > experienced, and that greatly benefits the next patient. Nothing stops anyone from posting here and as sue said anyone can use any kind of numerious filtering methods > Speaking of the amalgam subject, I'm sure you've seen Clinton's > rambling response to my message yesterday. > > He takes umbrage at my reference to "crazies," which is odd, unless he > thinks he is one. I certainly didn't say he was. The first message in this thread by AC explicity mentioned these "made up issues of toxicity". Stop ignoring the obvious and making calculated tangential refernces, then pretending you didn't say what you implied. You obviously had anti-amalgamists and fluordists in mind. If you didn't show some backbone and say specifically what you are talking about. And at the very least making such general accusations is irresponsabile. You even almost had Sue thinking you were talking about her! Furthermore (as I recall) in my message didn't I say, half kidding ( I will assume for the sake of argument you are calling me crazy, i.e in defense of the 'amalgam and fluoride' ( or any other kind of) "crazies"). I see you conviently left this out to go on with your comments, though ironically you picked up on this (my) concept to forumlate your own response. > It's also odd that he goes on and on about amalgam -- but my entire > message didn't even mention amalgams! . Don't play psychological games with me . Your not smarter than me. You and Amatus are evidently taking about issues like amalgam and Fluride and people who defend that. Otherwise what did you mean? Are you so arrogant that you think you say one thing and mean the other? Say what you mean and mean whay you say. Now if I am 'all wrong' about this let me know! > The funny thing is that Clinton doesn't have a clue WHAT my opinions > are about amalgam, or even whether I use the material -- or not. Are you kidding, you've been posting on this forum for quite a while, and we went though the whole Chet , dental board discussion, etc. Your obviously a group apologist, but hey maybe I'm wrong. What is your opinion. .... let me guess, it's in line with the ADA. As my doctor once said, If I am wrong about this "I will be sooo sorry". (And furthermore I did NOT take "every opportunity" to insult you. There were plenty of opportunties I missed!) "Your not smarter than me." __________________________ How would you know? At least I know how to spell. Regards, - dentaldoc > "Your not smarter than me." > __________________________ > > How would you know? Because I am a member of Mensa! > At least I know how to spell. Memorizing words wastes brain cells. > > "Your not smarter than me." > > __________________________ > > > > How would you know? > > Because I am a member of Mensa! I don't believe you. T > > > "Your not smarter than me." > > > __________________________ [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > T I knew you would say this. But doesn't history repeat itself or is your memory so poor? Feel free to confirm this email from Mensa! Mr. Zimmerman: Please feel free to post my message. American Mensa can confirm that Clinton Zimmerman was a member from September 1995 until March 1999. Regards, Paige Faulkner Membership Director American Mensa, Ltd. PaigeF@AmericanMensa.org www.us.mensa.org -----Original Message----- From: Clinton Zimmerman [mailto:clinton_zimm@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 2:56 PM To: MembershipDirector@AmericanMensa.org Subject: Membership proof Dear Membership Director: My name is Clinton Zimmerman and I was a member of Mensa a number of years ago from gaithersburg MD. I have an unusual request. I got into an arguement on the Usenet about a contentious issue, and impied that I should know what i was talking about because I am a member of Mensa! One person in particular claims that I am lying and wants me to prove it. Would you be able to email me confirmation of that or post on the Sci.med.dentistry google group (under partial bans of filling thread) without making reference to any personal identifiers other than my name? I know this is an unusual request but this would be helpful in getting some hard headed people to listen to what I am saying more seriously. Thanks, Clinton Zimmerman > I knew you would say this. But doesn't history repeat itself or is your > > memory so poor? Watch this... Dear Dr. Bad Please feel free to post my message. The House of Windsor can confirm that Tony Bad was King of England from 1678 to 1695. Regards, Joe Bagodonuts Historian/House of Windsor www.RoyalFamily.com p.s. If you are genuinely of such superior intellect it makes your moronic ramblings here and the fact you have so much time to devote to such nonsense even more hard to understand. Why don't you use that big brain of yours for something more productive then badgering people who you consider such intellectual inferiors? > > I knew you would say this. But doesn't history repeat itself or is your > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Regards, Sorry, that won't work, you have my full authorization to email Paige and confirm this. Now I am veryyyyyy glad I joined Mensa because before I couldn't understand the point of paying the membership fee! > p.s. If you are genuinely of such superior intellect it makes your moronic > ramblings I got posioned by amalgam and got upset. But you and other dentists don't give a darn if you turn a member of Mensa into a babbling idiot. Hg is not somthing to mess around with. Got it? Besides what did you expect? that people should act all calm and collected after getting posoined by a material that is known for making people go mad? You really want it both ways don't you? If the patient shows any signs of Hg toxicity they are a moron or a nut. but if they act normal, they are obviously fine. Rich spent years attacking Jan claiming that any immediate improvement is proof that symptoms are psychosomatic. But then the pro-amalgamists turn around and claim that anyone poisond by Hg should instaneosuly recover, magically, in a few yers, just by posting on the internet!!!!! Amazing!!!!! Do you know how sick it is when your profession poisons people and then attacks victims for "GASP" actually showing signs of hg toxicity????? or getting very upset about it? How would you react. ( iknow I know, if it were me I wouldn't be affected by Hg! I'd jog and work out! Heard it a million times) In fact I have seen some amalgam victims go crazy on other dental lists by the way and it isn't a pretty site. I'll spare you reposting. And also, as usual you are contradiciting yourself when convienent becaue before you said that many of of my posts "made a lot of sense" ( there is that pesky good Mensa memory again) >here and the fact you have so much time to devote to such nonsense > even more hard to understand. So you can post on two groups but I'm the one that has so much time on my hands? How much time do you spend watching TV? Tony , your hypocritical petty posting is begining to bore me. I don't have to justify an hour of internet usage to you, when your the one who should be accountable for the material you use. How much time have you spent testing your patients amalgams with a Jerome Hg meter? > Why don't you use that big brain of yours for > something more productive then badgering people who you consider such > intellectual inferiors? You may have a point there. If you can't undertand the physics of materials there is really no point in continuing to discuss the issue. As I said above to Sue, I am more interested in seeing what the thought process of dentists and patients is on amalgam. But the real answer to your question is that I was not sure your were my "intellectual inferior" in that, even if I was a better student than many of the posters everyone should be able to agree on basic scientific concepts. In other words I had a belief that everyone basically had to same common sense, and even if they didn't first think of a concept or idea in a 30 minute test, they certainly could understand it once it was explained. But after a couple years of postings I am beginning to wonder if most people just aren't capable of grasping some of the key issues regarding amalgam no matter how long anyone takes to explain it, They just don't seem to be able to model the physics of it in their head, And that certainly would explain it's continued widespread accptance. >Dear Membership Director: > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >Thanks, >Clinton Zimmerman ROFL! I'm a member of British Mensa but I wouldn't begin to think that means that people should automatically take notice of what I say. Sometimes I know what I'm talking about and sometimes I don't, which is about the same as just about everyone else. You'll have to do better than flash an expired Mensa membership card in order to be taken seriously. Ann > ROFL! I'm a member of British Mensa but I wouldn't begin to think > that means that people should automatically take notice of what I say. And as a member of Mensa you should know that this is not what I was saying. Dr. Bill merely asked me for proof that I was smarter than him. Did I say that people should "automatically take notice of what I say". Nope. > Sometimes I know what I'm talking about and sometimes I don't, which > is about the same as just about everyone else. I don't think it is a big deal either, it's actually pretty easily to qualify. I was only establishing that not only do I have more techinical background than almost all the dentists posting here, but am smarter as well. So it is pretenious for them to talk down their nose to me and other amalgam victims as experts. I also notice Your good at putting other people on the defensive but never make any scientific analysis yourself. Why don't I call you on the carpet for once. What technical background do you have since I've met even a lot of people who would barely qualify for Mensa and better with words but that were terrible in math and science? Like I said it is easy to qualify for Mensa, that is really the minimum standard to have some kind of reasonable disscusion. In fact I even read the most people with IQ's below 130 have trouble thinking out of the "group mindset". You'll have to do > better than flash an expired Mensa membership card in order to be > taken seriously. And as a member of Mensa, surely you see the double-standard in your statement since Dentists with no scienific training except a little chem.should be taken seriously just because they are dentists? Whoppeee! I spent four years drilling holes and passed college chem, that makes me an expert on work functions and thermonic emssion of metals, and even though I can't even grasp why amalgams should have a "vapor pressure??" I can assure the public that the material is safe because I placed so many?? Who is kidding whom? > Ann > Like I said it is easy to qualify for Mensa, that > is really the minimum standard to have some kind of reasonable > disscusion. In fact I even > read the most people with IQ's below 130 have trouble thinking out of > the "group mindset". Could you provide evidence for this phenomenon? I've never come across a piece of research suggesting that independent thought is tied to an IQ of 130 and above. And phenomena like group think occur in all groups, including academic settings, politics... - oh wait, I'd forgotten about politics. Maybe you've got a point ;-P Seriously though, there simply is no evidence for your assertion. I don't know where you read that, but I highly doubt it was a scientific publication. > > Like I said it is easy to qualify for Mensa, that > > is really the minimum standard to have some kind of reasonable [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > groups, including academic settings, politics... - oh wait, I'd > forgotten about politics. Maybe you've got a point ;-P Actually I think I came across a reference to this on the web sometime when I was looking up IQ tests. I believe the reference which may have been talking about some kind of psychological studies which even set the level higher, at around 137. That would mean that 99% of the population really isn't capable of true independent thinking. Anyway, That's a good question. I don't know if I'll be able to find the link. It would also be interesting to see if anyone had done more detailed research into that, who exactly made that comment, and what they defined as "group thinking" etc. > Seriously though, there simply is no evidence for your assertion. I > don't know where you read that, but I highly doubt it was a scientific > publication. Well, I don't know. I'm sure some studies have been done relating "group thinking" to IQ level. For example you could imagine that researchers have found that people with an IQ below 70 tend to think less independently from the group or their peers than people with IQ's above 100. It's really just a question of setting the level. Of course once people reach an IQ level where basic independent thought becomes possible, there probably isn't any guarantee that increased IQ will result in more independant thinking or that many people with high IQ's aren't "groupthinkers". In fact many people with high IQ's (such as Bobby Fisher) could be considered delusional in some ways. (Neither is there a guarantee that some with a very low IQ won't think indepently from the group I would think) > (Neither is there > a guarantee that some with a very low IQ won't think indepently from > the group I would think) Good point. >>Like I said it is easy to qualify for Mensa, that >>is really the minimum standard to have some kind of reasonable [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > don't know where you read that, but I highly doubt it was a scientific > publication. Do any educators use Stanford-Binet scores anymore? I know a Mensa member. He loves it. He says it's good for meeting "girls". Steve > Do any educators use Stanford-Binet scores anymore? > I know a Mensa member. He loves it. He says it's good for meeting > "girls". > > Steve Actually I think schools have done away with Stanford-Binet tests for sometime now. You actually don't have to take an IQ test to join mensa but can use other tests (or could before) such as the GMAT, GRE, SAT, Miller analogies test etc. That way someone who who is good in businesss or analogies might be able to get in using the GMAT or Miller analogies tests. if all else fails i heard that practicing with IQ tests can boost your score a good 30 points on a regular IQ test! >> Do any educators use Stanford-Binet scores anymore? >> I know a Mensa member. He loves it. He says it's good for meeting >> "girls". It is a social club so I suppose that's not surprising. >Actually I think schools have done away with Stanford-Binet tests for >sometime now. You actually don't have to take an IQ test to join >mensa but can use other tests In the UK you have to do an IQ test. SATs tests and the like aren't acceptable. I don't know much about American Mensa except that it depends when you took one of those tests as to how it is viewed. >(or could before) such as the GMAT, >GRE, SAT, Miller analogies test etc. That way someone who >who is good in businesss or analogies might be able to get in >using the GMAT or Miller analogies tests. if all else fails i heard >that practicing with IQ tests can boost your score a good 30 points >on a regular IQ test! I believe you can increase your score by a few points by practising but not 30 points. Ann > In the UK you have to do an IQ test. SATs tests and the like aren't > acceptable. I don't know much about American Mensa except that it > depends when you took one of those tests as to how it is viewed. While we are on the subject I see this on their site: We'll evaluate your scores for free in April! To qualify for Mensa, our only requirement is a score in the top 2 percent on any one of 200 accepted, standardized intelligence tests at any point during your life. And during the month of April, we are waiving the $30 fee for reviewing test scores for membership. Fill out the online application, print and mail it before the end of the month to take advantage of this offer! > To qualify for Mensa, our only requirement is a score in the top 2 > percent on any one of 200 accepted, standardized intelligence tests at > any point during your life. And during the month of April, we are > waiving the $30 fee for reviewing test scores for membership. Wott????? You mean you actually have to pay to join Mensa in the normal way (except for Aprili Fool's Month)? What halfway intelligent person would do that? > > To qualify for Mensa, our only requirement is a score in the top 2 > > percent on any one of 200 accepted, standardized intelligence tests at [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > way (except for Aprili Fool's Month)? > What halfway intelligent person would do that? That is one reason I am no longer a member. I never was too interested in Mensa stuff. You'll hav to talk with someone who goes to the activities to figure out if the due's are worth it. However, it is interesting how much people will pay for any kind of label. How much for a fancy car or for the "privelage" of saying you went to Harvard? a mere what $200,000? > Do any educators use Stanford-Binet scores anymore? Yes, I think the Wechsler is more popular though. Steven Bornfeld Wrote: > Do any educators use Stanford-Binet scores anymore? > I know a Mensa member. He loves it. He says it's good for meeting > "girls". > > Steve NOW THAT oNe IS FUNNY! :D SignatureSue > Steven Bornfeld Wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > NOW THAT oNe IS FUNNY! :D He's about 70 now. The "girls" he befriends are mostly about his age. Steve > > Steven Bornfeld Wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Steve Good for him. That is wonderful for him. My dad is 80 and seems to have some younger "girls" interested in him .... They are in their 50s. It used to embarass the heck out of him, but he has finally gotten over the stigma. Hey- It is best to grab happiness and enjoy other people that you can connect with, when you can. Age is a just number and a mentality. ex...Some 70-somethings relate to 50-somethings.... some don't. Relationships and friendships are about more than a number, IMHO. BTW, I know plenty of "girls" that have married men 7-10 years their junior. So what? It is all within one's own comfort zone and how you relate, IMHO. It is different for everyone. Sorry to get off-topic. RE: Amalgam fillings. My belief is that amalgam may prove toxic to a minoroty of unfortunate folks. However the science has not proven a causal link yet, even ofr a minority of folks. In the mean time, I am bringing kids (that come from families that are not seekign care) to low cost clinics. They are always given amalgam when a filling is required. Dr. Bornfeld, If I believed that this was harming them more than helping them, I could not be doing what I do. I believe that the chances of mercury poisoning are so slight that I am willing to take this chance. Without tooth pain these kids are able to concentrate in class and eat without pain. I believe that I am doing them a service and not poisoning them. In fact recent studies showed that the offspring of women that ingested high quantities of mercury (from seafood sources) were no more likely to suffer birth defects and toxic effects than those that were not exposed in utero. I was surprised, but that is truly what the data showed. The study was not skewed to protect the dental industry. Sue > Good for him. That is wonderful for him. My dad is 80 and seems to > have some younger "girls" interested in him .... They are in their 50s. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > Sue I'm not pollyanna about this, but I'm also a grownup and few issues are black and white--not even this one. You only have to look at what passes for political discourse in the US to know how polarized everything can become. I have no intention of participating in any debate of the amalgam issue anymore, as it was long ago demonstrated here and elsewhere that there is nothing to be gained by engaging. I will only say that I am tolerant of different views, and generally prefer to interact with tolerant people. Most people hold these views for any number of reasons, and malice is rarely if ever one of them. But there is no question that amalgam usage will continue to decrease, esp. as alternative restorative materials improve. Steve Steven Bornfeld Wrote: > > Good for him. That is wonderful for him. My dad is 80 and seems to > > have some younger "girls" interested in him .... They are in their [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > > Steve I agree. If amalgam is some day replaced by an alternative restorative material that would be great. However in the meantime I am not going to kick myself for helping to get some kids a bit of oral health education and needed care even if that means silver fillings. My parents did that for me and the rest of us kids growing up and we suffered no ill-effects. In fact I am grateful to our parents and to our dentist for the care that we received. And if my gratitude bothers someone else, that is their problem. I do not apologize for that. I am only sorry for losing my temper here. I do not wish to engage in the amalgam debate. I find it useless to engage in that sort of discussion here as it only becomes an emotional battle with sniping on both sides. I generally ignore those threads until dentists say they are leaving because they cannot take the constant debate and resulting badgering re: this and other controverisal topics. Oh well. Their choice. Their battle. Take Care. Sue SignatureSue letsconnect Wrote: > > Like I said it is easy to qualify for Mensa, tha > > is really the minimum standard to have some kind of reasonabl [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > don't know where you read that, but I highly doubt it was a scientifi > publication. In fact I even read the most people with IQ's below 130 have troubl thinking out of the "group mindset" Reply. Maybe only those with IQs over 130 believe everything they read Group mindset. Does Clinton's mindset agree with the anti-amalgamis group mindset? Hmmmmmm I wonder. If so then his IQ must be less tha 130...... -- Su > I was only establishing that not only do I have more techinical > background > than almost all the dentists posting here, but am smarter as well. I "real" smart person would never be dumb enough to make this proclamation or assume that a different view point must be borne of ignorance. This is a leap you consistently make which either says your proclamations about your intelligence are false, or that smart ain't what it used to be. > So > it is pretenious for them to talk down their nose to me and other > amalgam > victims as experts. This is a sword that cuts both ways...a point lost on you. T > > I was only establishing that not only do I have more techinical > > background > > than almost all the dentists posting here, but am smarter as well. > > I "real" smart person would never be dumb enough to make this proclamation > or assume that a different view point must be borne of ignorance. All you ever do is take a persons actions and then explain why you would never do that, or that was dumb. Your very good at straightjacketing the other person by imposing all kind of irrelevant conditions untl finally, the only one whose actions or statements truly have merit, are surprise...those that agree precisely with you! You and some other dentists are the one's who started the game of declaring what "experts" you are and how dumb, uneducated and unqualified the anti-amalgamsists must be, even to the ludicrous extreme of stating that only dentists who are "qualified" should post on the subject, but do you straightjacket yourself or the other denitsts? No, you are free to do and saying anything no matter how outrageous and pretentious, even when it clearly contradicts current research, because that is the ADA's (nonlegally binding) opinion, while the anti-amalgamists must walk the perfect line. This is a > leap you consistently make which either says your proclamations about your > intelligence are false, or that smart ain't what it used to be. Okay, so the fact that people thought the earth was flat wasn't borne of ignorance. How can you be so sure that acceptance of a (potentially) wrong scientific viewpoint isn't caused by scientific ignorance? > ROFL! I'm a member of British Mensa but I wouldn't begin to think > that means that people should automatically take notice of what I say. So what do you think, a few dentists formed their own group. How about www.sci.med.mensa?? Of course those having the "intelligence" to comprehend the amalgam issue would be given automatic membership. And in fact, maybe such a group WOULD actually stand a chance of having meaningful scientific discussion without the name calling and "I am dentist, so therefore I am right" attitude which had plagued this NG! >> ROFL! I'm a member of British Mensa but I wouldn't begin to think >> that means that people should automatically take notice of what I say. > >So what do you think, a few dentists formed their own group. How about >www.sci.med.mensa?? Why would people want to read a group like that? They won't. Ann > > > How would you know? > > > > Because I am a member of Mensa! > > I don't believe you. Wrong once again! Mr. Zimmerman: Please feel free to post my message. American Mensa can confirm that Clinton Zimmerman was a member from September 1995 until March 1999. Regards, Paige Faulkner Membership Director American Mensa, Ltd. PaigeF@AmericanMensa.org www.us.mensa.org > > > "Your not smarter than me." > > > __________________________ [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > T What, I thought all the dentists were members of Mensa? Who would like to start a group sci.med.mensa ? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Zimmerman: Please feel free to post my message. American Mensa can confirm that Clinton Zimmerman was a member from September 1995 until March 1999. Regards, Paige Faulkner Membership Director American Mensa, Ltd. PaigeF@AmericanMensa.org www.us.mensa.org > > > "Your not smarter than me." > > > __________________________ [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > T YOu shouldn't be so surprised. You already failed Mensa question 1. Why doesn't the earth cool off? Tony's answer (which shows no comprehnsion that any system without a heat source will eventually diffuse that heat away) is: "There is Volacno's so the earth can't cool off" Your scientific analysis of amalgam is on a similar plane though you can' realize it. > YOu shouldn't be so surprised. > You already failed Mensa question 1. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Volacno's so the earth can't cool off" Your scientific analysis of > amalgam is on a similar plane though you can' realize it. Show me where I said this. My only comment on volcanic activity was that you, mensa man, the only one here capable of deep scientific insight and understanding, was unaware there was such activity. T Ok I didn't reread you message after my first response. I just reread it now though and you clearly meant (at least in part) the ant-amalgamist by "the prescence of the crazies". So your denial in your last message just makes you a hypocritical a.shole. You know what anyone is a fool that lets you and other lying dentist but Hg in their mouth. Over and out twit. > Ok I didn't reread you message after my first response. I just reread > it [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that lets you and other lying dentist but Hg in their mouth. Over and > out twit. __________________________ Thanks, once again, for proving my point that visitors here are subjected to repeated insults! Such vibrant illustrations of my main point save me a lot of typing. Did you EVER try discussing anything without resorting to name-calling?? Regards, - dentaldoc > Thanks, once again, for proving my point that visitors here are > subjected to repeated insults! Not to belabor the point , but once again your hypocrisy show. Anyone can read the thread and see who started the name calling. first AC (steven manusco) in the very first post referring to "made up issue of toxicity" (opps has he read the many current active court cases) such as Kreger vs Dentsply. Then you with "the prescence of the crazies". > Such vibrant illustrations of my main point save me a lot of typing. > > Did you EVER try discussing anything without resorting to > name-calling?? Do you think that just because you have dental degree you can ignore the obvious? I've been trying for years to have a meaningful scientific discussion. I guess that discussion will not start with you! > "Thanks for the invite, but I kind-of like the good dentists and > people [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "We can post here without gettting yelled at, threatened, played or > ridiculed. You don't mean it! Sue said that, did she?!?! Well, well, well. Sue is NOT honest... Sue IS in FACT. a suck up to the denstists here...... Sue in FACT does R I D I C U L E!!!! Reply. First I make a digital recording of the following: Liar Robert is a stalker That is a fact And then I would add werewolf howls, Ghoul sounds and a mad shriek. I would then use a mixer to cretae a cyber "LIAR" (LOUD obnoxious tone) "Robert is a STalker" (really whiny) "This is fact" (quick and squeaky)" Said randomly in various combinations, mixed with the other sounds. Then I would take large box and make it look like a computer screen (to wear) I would place on the screen some psychodelic light strobe showing through. On the back of the box I woudl have a HUGE skull and cross-bones and Hg printed everywhere. I would wear some funky tennis shoes with purple shoelaces and back tights. I would walk around doing an uncoordinated break dance to the cyber-mix and strobe lights. On one sleeve I would have printed "LolliRocks like GoldiLocks" ON my tush I would have printed: "I love JOelY".. with big hearts all over the place. Oh and I would carry a huge lollipop and just be a real pain in the A#@$ all night. -Sue > _____________________________________ > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > far more subject to rude and insulting behavior, as well as personal > attacks, than on ANY other sites -- bar none. That IS a flat out LIE. Bill KNOWS it. Take *JanBewski on Anal Sex* for instance! Rather it IS the dentists themselves who DISH out the ABUSE, INSULTS and RUDE BEHAVIOR... BAR NONE....ZERO. > Just look at what Dr. Braces has had to endure this past week! > > Although it doesn't bother hard-nosed, old-time participants like me or > Steve or Joel, because we recognize the powerlessness of the insulting > posters for what it is, most people don't return to places where they > are attacked and insulted. Joel??? What a hoot!!!! With his past 20,000 posts using MY name. What a LIAR, you are!!!!! > Although I know that you experienced an unfortunate conflict with just > a couple of individuals here on SMD, the majority of the dentists and > other posters here did not have any such conflict with you and got > along just fine, as we continue to do today! You don't say....... > I know that I have read and enjoyed your messages for quite a while. No > problems here. Big eye rollllllll here,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, > But the fact remains that there are indeed, many non-dentists who post > here who are abusive and intolerant of any viewpoint but their own > particular quirks. > > Much of what they post is just plain ignorant, but they don't care. You have that backwards..... http://tinyurl.com/fctfd Dentists have LIED for so long, they know longer know what is a LIE.. Your choice of words and DECEIVING are LIES. There was NO fraud!!! There was NO imcompetence!!!!! There was NO Malpractice!! There was NO substandards. Ding Ding Ding....... > Over the last twelve years that I have participated here on SMD, there > have been literally hundreds of very accomplished, scientifically [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > electronic news and commentary distribution. But that has greatly > changed! I hope most open-minded people will view Joel's attempts to characterise the PHS report as proving that amalgams are safe, as a gross misrepresentation of the facts. People who rely on professionals to know their stuff, deserve better. Hi Judge Joel, You are representing the most prejudicial attitude I saw in a long time. Did you get that from being a judge during the witch- processes in a former life, or what? Either you are grossly misinformed or you are intentionally spreading blatant lies. Hans ===== Dear Dr. Eichen, >> It's unfortunate that you don't have anything more constructive to do >> with your life other than amusing yourself and your colleague dentists [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >> and pregnant women.... these countries are banning the use of mercury >> amalgams. Refer your colleagues to WWW.TOXICTEETH.ORG, WWW.TESTFOUNDATION.ORG, >> WWW.IAOMT.ORG, http://www.home.earthlink.net/~berniew1/indexa.html, >> and give them the studies which show that dentists have the highest >> rate of suicide professionaly in this country. >> >> I suggest you keep up with the significant news of the day.....or are >> you still reading comic books. === To everyone who do not understand why Joel wants to make a complete fool out of himself, Wrong again ! Show me where I ever used the word "tweezers" ! If you cannot support your repeated allegations I can only conclude you made a pretty big fool out of yourself - again ! Cheers, Hans Joel M. Eichen wrote: >The readers will decide! Indeed ! The fun part is that this is all about your mind - what you thought that I said. Sofar you have not been able to point out anything, in spite of all your re-postings, to support what you claim I said. And I'm still waiting! Hans Joel M. Eichen wrote: >At least we settled ... I've been settling fine all along. I am waiting for you to prove that your allegations are right. Or to watch you trying to wiggle your way of this. So Joel, which one will it be? Joel wrote: >Hans said Dentatus should be inserted, preferably with tweezers Hans replied: >Not with one word did I reveal how I work with the Dentatus. Not >one single word! Neither did I mention the word "tweezers" ! Still waiting .... Hans Joel M. Eichen wrote: >Funny. Hans turning the circumstance around . . . . That was a nice attempt to wiggle. What's next? Sill waiting for you to prove that your allegations are right. Or to keep on watching you wiggle until you smoke yourself. Which one is next? Smoke or standard smokescreen? Hans Everything else here is Joel's attempts to make a huge smokescreen so no one will spot him in his attempts to pry his foot out of his mouth. Thats all there is >Nelson wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >>don't have to read it. >>Other comments in text: Subject: Re: Outta here for awhile From: "Dr. Steve" smancus.takeout@home.msen.com Date: 3/18/03 10:17 PM US Eastern Standard Time Message-id: <v7fo43feqokq88@corp.supernews.com> See Joel??? Your constant ridiculous cross posting of stuff no one but you is interested in has driven more people off this forum. Before long. it will be just the Eichen cross posting news. > Today, there are literally thousands of dentists on sites like the > Internet Dental Forum and Dentaltown, as well as the newer [quoted text clipped - 66 lines] > Thanks, > - dentaldoc http//www.toxicteeth.net http://tuberose.com/Amalgam_Fillings.html http://tuberose.com/Mercury.html Recently, Caulk Company, manufacturers of Dispersalloy, published the latest Materials Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) and their Direction For Use (DFU) which includes contraindications to the use of dental amalgam. (.http://www.caulk.com/MSDSDFU/DispersDFU.html February 1998) OOOOps, it's gone, what a mystery! I just happen to still have it. **** the manufacturers are now acknowledging the intrinsic dangers of this material.***** The legal implications of this latest development are far reaching. If you continue to use dental amalgam you may be playing legal roulette with your assets. Caulk state that dental amalgam should not be used: 1. In proximal or occlusal contact to dissimilar metal restorations. 2. In patients with severe renal deficiency. 3. In patients with known allergies to amalgam. 4. For retrograde or endodontic filling. 5. As a filling material for cast crown. 6. In children 6 and under. 7. In expectant mothers. The Caulk Co. home page also warns that mercury may be a skin sensitizer, pulmonary sensitizer, nephrotoxin and neurotoxin and, further, cautions that the number of amalgam restorations for one patient should be kept to a minimum. Caulk has also published the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for mercury. Of particular importance, are some statements made in "Section VIII - Control Measures, Inhalation, Chronic: Inhalation of mercury vapour over a long period may cause mercurialism, which is characterized by fine tremors and erethism. Tremors may affect the hands first, but may also become evident in the face, arms, and legs. Erethism may be manifested by abnormal shyness, blushing, self consciousness, depression or despondency, resentment of criticism, irritability or excitability, headache, fatigue, and insomnia. In severe cases, hallucinations, loss of memory, and mental deterioration may occur. Concentrations as low as 0.03 mg/m3 have induced psychiatric symptoms in humans. Renal involvement may be indicated by proteinuria, albuminuria, enzymuria, and anuria. Other effects may include salivation, gingivitis, stomatitis, loosening of the teeth, blue lines on the gums, diarrhea, chronic pneumonitis and mild anemia. Repeated exposure to mercury and its compounds may result in sensitisation. Intrauterine exposure may result in tremors and involuntary movements in the infants. Mercury is excreted in breast milk. Paternal reproductive effects and effects on fertility have been reported in male rats following repeated inhalation exposures." Ivoclar/Vivadent go further in their contraindications. They state that their amalgam is: 1. Not only contraindicated for expectant mothers but also for nursing mothers. 2. Not only contraindicated for patients with severe renal deficiency but for all patients suffering from any reduced kidney function. The Australian Dental Association is now in a difficult, if not untenable, position. The prevailing ADA position is that patient exposure to mercury from amalgam dental fillings is medically insignificant. At the same time major amalgam manufacturers are exhibiting public warnings. All dentists must now acknowledge the contradictions between ADA policy and amalgam manufacturers' public warnings. Medico-legally, the dentist who ignores manufacturer's public warnings places himself/herself in a precarious position. Dentists are obliged to be familiar with the information provided in MSDS's for the products they use and if patients suffer ill effects from the product being used in a way which is contrary to the manufacturer's directions, then the dentist may be liable for the consequences. In this situation it does not matter what the Australian Dental Association says, as it is the dentist who will be held responsible. You may be interested to know that the American Dental Association has recognised such a possibility and in a recent case petitioned the court to release it from a suit filed jointly against a dentist and the AmDA,. The AmDA claimed that it owed no responsibility for the advice being given. The court granted the petition, which left the dentist, who had relied on AmDA advice, as the sole defendant. It is little comfort that you may be insured. All dentists must be aware of the potential adverse effects of mercury exposure and must also be attentive to the potential effects in pregnant females and nursing mothers. Before placing another amalgam filling, a dentist might be well advised to establish that the patient has normal kidney function. It is not clear whether taking a medical history will suffice or whether a kidney function test might need to be requested. The galvanic effect created by placing different metals in a mouth with amalgam fillings has the potential to increase mercury release from all amalgam fillings. This also has implications not generally considered when placing stainless steel orthodontic appliances in a patient with amalgam fillings. The use of metal pins with amalgam may need to be reconsidered. If amalgam is contraindicated in a six year old, the next question must surely be - at what age is amalgam safe? The scientific research shows clearly that mercury is toxic to all people, at all levels. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry in the USA lists mercury as one of the twenty most hazardous substances to human beings. The ATSDR's current allowable Minimal Risk Levels (MRL) for acute exposure are 0.02 mcgm/m3 and for chronic exposure 0.014 mcgm/m3. Compare this with published research, indicating amalgam mercury vapour concentrations in the mouth, as high as 87.5 mcgm/m3. The absorption rate of inhaled mercury vapour is extremely high, approximately 80% of the inhaled dose, reaching the brain tissue within one blood circulation cycle. The toxic threshold for mercury vapour has never been found. Even the US Environmental Protection Agency has so stated. The existing occupational standards are all specifically declared to be estimates only on the appearance of clinically observable signs and symptoms. The World Health Organisation, in 1991, made it clear that there is NO safe level of mercury vapour and that amalgam represents the greatest source of mercury to the general population. The spectre of potential liability for adverse effects from dental amalgam is now a reality. ASOMAT recently made a 4 page submission to the Federal Executive of the Australian Dental Association offering confidential background briefings about the latest research to all Executive members and any other officers or committees. ASOMAT's submission was conciliatory and asked for the lines of communication to be opened so that the ADA could stay informed about ALL the research. Our offer of cooperation was peremptorily rejected. Any dentist faced with patients wanting the removal of amalgams from their mouths should note that specific protocols exist for the safer removal of amalgam. Unless you are familiar with these protocols, it is not recommended to proceed with the wholesale removal of dental amalgam. You may create more problems than you solve. It would be appropriate for you to contact your insurer and ask the specific question..." If I use amalgam contrary to the specific warnings and contraindications stated by the manufacturer and my patient suffers effects known to be associated with mercury exposure, will you cover me fully for my legal costs and any damages in the event that the patient sues me? " Whatever the answer, get it in writing! ASOMAT's concern has always been that dentists and patients be fully informed. We are very worried that the profession is badly prepared to deal with these quickly changing circumstances, especially in light of a recent press conference in Sweden on the 19th February 1998. At that time the Swedish Council for Planning and Coordinating Research, a body commissioned by the Swedish Government to review the literature on amalgams, stated the following.. "Mercury from amalgam may damage the brain, kidneys and the immune system of a great number of people. The effects in foetus and children are of most concern." Those are the conclusions of a report soon to be handed to the Government. "There is no conflict any more", says Gunnar Goude from the board of the Swedish Council for Planning and Coordinating Research (FRN), after reviewing the comprehensive documentation from the four seminars. "There is total agreement among the Board members that it is time to move forward and leave amalgam. Jan does not realize that if she dishes, she must expect to get dished. Maybe mercury poisoning takes that sort of common sensibility away? -Sue (Standing by for flames and to be called a LIAR at least 400x) SignatureSue > Jan does not realize that if she dishes, she must expect to get dished. Wrong , and quite frankly I agree that what you did (the halloween joke) was very insenstiive. I was offended myself as an "amalgam victim". Why do dentists need defending anyway, are you their mother? > Maybe mercury poisoning takes that sort of common sensibility away? You know we are going light on the dentists. I could post "contracts" around the clock asking dentists to sign statments that amalgam was not harmful and be 1000 times more obnoxious with complete jusification. We could post 100's of research articles and DEMAND scienific refutation instead of letting the dentists wimp out because they say "they are going on vacation". You think dealing with Jan is a pain?? Wait until you deal with some amalgam victims who are REALLY going to ask difficult and embarrasing questions 24/7 on this NG!! As you alluded to before most don't bother because it is a waste of times. Dentists will also come up with the "smirk faced" responses until they are buried by lawsuits. Clinton Wrote: > > Jan does not realize that if she dishes, she must expect to get > dished. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > with > the "smirk faced" responses until they are buried by lawsuits. Clinton, Then why does Jan keep bringing it up and calling attention to herself in this manner? Normal people let those things go. Talk about insensitivity. Your problems take precedence over all other patient questions. Your personal agenda takes precedence over everyone else. When your friends come and bomabard this NG, you know exactly what will happen. Everyone will leave. Go ahead, go for it. See what you can accomplish. Everyone will leave, ignore or argue just to argue. If you are as intelligent as you seem to think you are and as dedicated to your cause as you say you are, you would be using your time more wisely. JMO -Sue SignatureSue > Clinton Wrote: > Then why does Jan keep bringing it up and calling attention to herself > in this manner? Normal people let those things go. bringing up amalgam I assume you mean? I am not saying I agree completely with her posting style. On the otherhand there are many types of posters and styles. You yourself said that it was wise to realize that Joel was cut from a different mold, yet why so harsh with one poster. Unfortunately the premise that amalgam cannot be a legitamite cause of health problems (no one even said "most" people are affected by it) seems to drive your comments. The dentists need no defending, believe me. they have armies of lawyers, the standard of care on their side and are well insulated in their professional organizations. > Talk about insensitivity. Your problems take precedence over all other > patient questions. Here we go with the exaggeration. You are really saying amalgam shouldn't be discussed at all and CERTAINLY not at the "incovience of dentists" ,becasue it's not a real problem right? And why blame one poster who can be filtered out anyway. Surely this one topic shouldn't affect dentists answering other patient questions, but you've decided to use that as an excuse to bash one poster. > Your personal agenda takes precedence over everyone else. I think you've got it reversed, your agenda and the dentists agenda of not answering direct questions (on amagam) takes precedence. I think it shows rotten character to even use the threat of not answering other posters as an attempt to blackmail people discussing the issue by trying to get everyone to turn against them. Really pathetic. Amalgam threads are independent from other threads. I myself only try to respond in threads where amalgam is already being discussed, but look at Joel postings. At any rate as I said IT could be worse. Seems to me you should be deriding dentists for repeatedly avoiding the issue, not attacking the victim! > When your friends come and bomabard this NG, you know exactly what will > happen. Everyone will leave. I am not bombarding this newsgroup. Jan has not even been posting here recently. I never said who was and wasn't my friend. you kneejerk need to defend the group (the dentists) at the expense of the odd-person-out is really not too flattering. Do you get some kind of personal satisfaction out ot that that gives a false sense of belonging? True acceptance by a group does come mean attacking people you think are against or attacking the group. > Go ahead, go for it. See what you can accomplish. Everyone will > leave, ignore or argue just to argue. That could be true of any topic, but you've decided to single out the issue rather than the way it is discussed. why don' you go ballistic over Fluoride posts? > If you are as intelligent as you seem to think you are and as dedicated > to your cause as you say you are, you would be using your time more > wisely. And IMO it's not up to you to direct me how to use my time or anyone else, nor is it you business, UNL |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message