Teeth, Amalgam controversy .... JADA March 2001

Amalgam controversy .... JADA March 2001

Author	Message
Joel_Eiche #1 / 10	Amalgam controversy .... JADA March 2001 Quote: > OK. I doubt that they would read it, just as I doubt that you have. Too many > ego's involved. This right and wrong thing is more important than people's > health. Taking away the lobbyist would help IMHO. $$$$$$ rules the world. Normally, I agree.
Wed, 03 Sep 2003 07:23:06 GMT

Joel_Eiche #2 / 10	Amalgam controversy .... JADA March 2001 Quote: > >Wrong pages ...... wrong filling material reports .... what next? > Ooops, you didn't answer the question. Trying to sweep their lies under the > rug?? Okay, the ADA must be lying .... Quote: > That has been done far too long and people are sill suffering. I experienced > that suffering,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and that's why I am here. OK. Quote: > Jan > >> Jan
Wed, 03 Sep 2003 07:24:23 GMT

JDrew639 #3 / 10	Amalgam controversy .... JADA March 2001 Quote: >Date: 3/15/01 7:45 PM US Eastern Standard Time >One very kind individual who has followed our posts has forwarded me this >reference to an interesting article: >JADA March 2001 >The Amalgam Controversy: An Evidence-Based Analysis >page 348 >John E. Dodes, D.D.S. >Background. There are a number of patients and health care professionals who >believe dental amalgam restorations are a factor in a host of diseases and >conditions. They have been influenced by anecdotal case reports in the >medical and dental literature, research published in the refereed literature >and media stories concerning the alleged dangers of amalgam restorations. No that's incorrect. They have seen studies and evidence. Dr Boyd Haley Ph.D and J Curt Pendergrass Ph.D of the University of Kentucky have done the studies that have shown the dangers of mercury amalgams to some people. Perhaps the author of this article is not aware of these studies? Take a good long look. http://www.altcorp.com/amalgampage.htm There are many more. http://www.amalgam.org Quote: >Methods. The author uses an evidence-based approach in analyzing the data >both supporting and condemning the continued use of amalgam restorations. He >reviewed the articles from both peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed sources >and evaluated their relevance, research design and statistical analysis, as >well as whether the conclusions follow from the data. >Conclusions. There are numerous logical and methodological errors in the >antiamalgam literature. Like what? Please explain. . The author concludes that the evidence supporting Quote: >the safety of amalgam restorations is compelling. Compelling? But he doesn't have any studies that prove it? Quote: >Clinical Implications. Amalgam restorations remain safe and effective. What clinical implications? This is nothing other than an opinion. Quote: >Dentists should educate patients and other health care professionals who may >be mistakenly concerned about amalgam safety. Yes. Some write books to do that very thing. Like Tooth Truth by Dr Frank Jerome. Quote: >For the complete article, see the March issue of JADA. No thanks I think I have already seen enough. This is an opinion with absolutly NO proof. Ding Ding.............back to round one. Jan - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Quote: >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >---- >Document Posted: March 2001 >Page Updated: March 01, 2001 >Document address: http://www.ada.org/prof/pubs/jada/0103/ab-6.html
Tue, 02 Sep 2003 11:21:38 GMT

JDrew639 #4 / 10	Amalgam controversy .... JADA March 2001 Quote: >Date: 3/15/01 7:45 PM US Eastern Standard Time >Document Posted: March 2001 >Page Updated: March 01, 2001 >Document address: http://www.ada.org/prof/pubs/jada/0103/ab-6.html Oops! We apologize for this inconvenience. You have reached a page that isn't working properly. This page electronically reports errors to our Webmaster. We should have this page repaired soon. Please click here to return to ADA.org or you can visit our site map by clicking here. A message has been sent to the webmaster about this missing page. Thank you for visiting ADA.org. LOL..........ADA org. What a wonderful source! Have they been caught in any more lies lately? Jan
Tue, 02 Sep 2003 11:25:42 GMT

Joel_Eiche #5 / 10	Amalgam controversy .... JADA March 2001 One very kind individual who has followed our posts has forwarded me this reference to an interesting article: JADA March 2001 The Amalgam Controversy: An Evidence-Based Analysis page 348 John E. Dodes, D.D.S. Background. There are a number of patients and health care professionals who believe dental amalgam restorations are a factor in a host of diseases and conditions. They have been influenced by anecdotal case reports in the medical and dental literature, research published in the refereed literature and media stories concerning the alleged dangers of amalgam restorations. Methods. The author uses an evidence-based approach in analyzing the data both supporting and condemning the continued use of amalgam restorations. He reviewed the articles from both peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed sources and evaluated their relevance, research design and statistical analysis, as well as whether the conclusions follow from the data. Conclusions. There are numerous logical and methodological errors in the antiamalgam literature. The author concludes that the evidence supporting the safety of amalgam restorations is compelling. Clinical Implications. Amalgam restorations remain safe and effective. Dentists should educate patients and other health care professionals who may be mistakenly concerned about amalgam safety. For the complete article, see the March issue of JADA. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Document Posted: March 2001 Page Updated: March 01, 2001 Document address: http://www.ada.org/prof/pubs/jada/0103/ab-6.html
Tue, 02 Sep 2003 08:45:05 GMT

Joel_Eiche #6 / 10	Amalgam controversy .... JADA March 2001 Quote: > >Date: 3/15/01 7:45 PM US Eastern Standard Time > >One very kind individual who has followed our posts has forwarded me this > >reference to an interesting article: > >JADA March 2001 > >The Amalgam Controversy: An Evidence-Based Analysis > >page 348 > >John E. Dodes, D.D.S. > >Background. There are a number of patients and health care professionals who > >believe dental amalgam restorations are a factor in a host of diseases and > >conditions. They have been influenced by anecdotal case reports in the > >medical and dental literature, research published in the refereed literature > >and media stories concerning the alleged dangers of amalgam restorations. > No that's incorrect. They have seen studies and evidence. Dr Boyd Haley Ph.D > and J Curt Pendergrass Ph.D of the University of Kentucky have done the studies > that have shown the dangers of mercury amalgams to some people. I will pass along your information to the American Dental Association, the Centers for Disease Control, the United States Public Health Service, the National Institutes of Health and 53 dental schools ..... - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Quote: > Perhaps the author of this article is not aware of these studies? > Take a good long look. > http://www.altcorp.com/amalgampage.htm > There are many more. > http://www.amalgam.org > >Methods. The author uses an evidence-based approach in analyzing the data > >both supporting and condemning the continued use of amalgam restorations. He > >reviewed the articles from both peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed sources > >and evaluated their relevance, research design and statistical analysis, as > >well as whether the conclusions follow from the data. > >Conclusions. There are numerous logical and methodological errors in the > >antiamalgam literature. > Like what? Please explain. . Please see the article in the Journal of the American Dental Association ..... Quote: > The author concludes that the evidence supporting > >the safety of amalgam restorations is compelling. > Compelling? > But he doesn't have any studies that prove it? Is the ADA lying again? You decide. Quote: > >Clinical Implications. Amalgam restorations remain safe and effective. > What clinical implications? > This is nothing other than an opinion. Ahh, I get it. Thanks. Quote: > >Dentists should educate patients and other health care professionals who may > >be mistakenly concerned about amalgam safety. > Yes. Some write books to do that very thing. Like Tooth Truth by Dr Frank > Jerome. Ahhhh, I see ...... Quote: > >For the complete article, see the March issue of JADA. > No thanks I think I have already seen enough. This is an opinion with > absolutly NO proof. OK - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Quote: > Ding Ding.............back to round one. > Jan >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > >---- > >Document Posted: March 2001 > >Page Updated: March 01, 2001 > >Document address: http://www.ada.org/prof/pubs/jada/0103/ab-6.html
Tue, 02 Sep 2003 20:36:24 GMT

Joel_Eiche #7 / 10	Amalgam controversy .... JADA March 2001 Quote: > >Date: 3/15/01 7:45 PM US Eastern Standard Time > >Document Posted: March 2001 > >Page Updated: March 01, 2001 > >Document address: http://www.ada.org/prof/pubs/jada/0103/ab-6.html > Oops! We apologize for this inconvenience. > You have reached a page that isn't working properly. > This page electronically reports errors to our Webmaster. > We should have this page repaired soon. > Please click here to return to ADA.org > or you can visit our site map by clicking here. > A message has been sent to the webmaster about this missing page. > Thank you for visiting ADA.org. > LOL..........ADA org. > What a wonderful source! > Have they been caught in any more lies lately? ****** Wrong pages ...... wrong filling material reports .... what next? - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Quote: > Jan
Tue, 02 Sep 2003 20:37:38 GMT

Andrew Koeni #8 / 10	Amalgam controversy .... JADA March 2001 Quote: >> Document address: http://www.ada.org/prof/pubs/jada/0103/ab-6.html JDrew63929> Oops! We apologize for this inconvenience. The correct URL is http://www.ada.org/prof/pubs/jada/archives/0103/ab-6.html It took me less than a minute to find it. The reason that the original posting contains the wrong URL is that the page itself incorrectly states its own address! Such typos are not uncommon. Look at the bottom of the page and see for yourself. --
Tue, 02 Sep 2003 20:56:18 GMT

JDrew639 #9 / 10	Amalgam controversy .... JADA March 2001 Quote: >Date: 3/16/01 7:37 AM US Eastern Standard Time >> >Date: 3/15/01 7:45 PM US Eastern Standard Time >> >Document Posted: March 2001 >> >Page Updated: March 01, 2001 >> >Document address: http://www.ada.org/prof/pubs/jada/0103/ab-6.html >> Oops! We apologize for this inconvenience. >> You have reached a page that isn't working properly. >> This page electronically reports errors to our Webmaster. >> We should have this page repaired soon. >> Please click here to return to ADA.org >> or you can visit our site map by clicking here. >> A message has been sent to the webmaster about this missing page. >> Thank you for visiting ADA.org. >> LOL..........ADA org. >> What a wonderful source! >> Have they been caught in any more lies lately? >****** >Wrong pages ...... wrong filling material reports .... what next? Ooops, you didn't answer the question. Trying to sweep their lies under the rug?? That has been done far too long and people are sill suffering. I experienced that suffering,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and that's why I am here. Jan - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Quote: >> Jan
Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:09:00 GMT

JDrew639 #10 / 10	Amalgam controversy .... JADA March 2001 Quote: >Date: 3/16/01 7:36 AM US Eastern Standard Time >> >Date: 3/15/01 7:45 PM US Eastern Standard Time >> >One very kind individual who has followed our posts has forwarded me this >> >reference to an interesting article: >> >JADA March 2001 >> >The Amalgam Controversy: An Evidence-Based Analysis >> >page 348 >> >John E. Dodes, D.D.S. >> >Background. There are a number of patients and health care professionals >who >> >believe dental amalgam restorations are a factor in a host of diseases >and >> >conditions. They have been influenced by anecdotal case reports in the >> >medical and dental literature, research published in the refereed >literature >> >and media stories concerning the alleged dangers of amalgam restorations. >> No that's incorrect. They have seen studies and evidence. Dr Boyd Haley >Ph.D >> and J Curt Pendergrass Ph.D of the University of Kentucky have done the >studies >> that have shown the dangers of mercury amalgams to some people. >I will pass along your information to the American Dental Association, the >Centers for Disease Control, the United States Public Health Service, the >National Institutes of Health and 53 dental schools ..... OK. I doubt that they would read it, just as I doubt that you have. Too many ego's involved. This right and wrong thing is more important than people's health. Taking away the lobbyist would help IMHO. $$$$$$ rules the world. - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Quote: >> Perhaps the author of this article is not aware of these studies? >> Take a good long look. >> http://www.altcorp.com/amalgampage.htm >> There are many more. >> http://www.amalgam.org >> >Methods. The author uses an evidence-based approach in analyzing the data >> >both supporting and condemning the continued use of amalgam restorations. >He >> >reviewed the articles from both peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed >sources >> >and evaluated their relevance, research design and statistical analysis, >as >> >well as whether the conclusions follow from the data. >> >Conclusions. There are numerous logical and methodological errors in the >> >antiamalgam literature. >> Like what? Please explain. . >Please see the article in the Journal of the American Dental Association No you posted the article, you tell us. Quote: >> The author concludes that the evidence supporting >> >the safety of amalgam restorations is compelling. >> Compelling? >> But he doesn't have any studies that prove it? >Is the ADA lying again? You decide. No doubt about it. They were caught in one lie,,,,,,,,,,,and then made up another. - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Quote: >> >Clinical Implications. Amalgam restorations remain safe and effective. >> What clinical implications? >> This is nothing other than an opinion. >Ahh, I get it. Thanks. >> >Dentists should educate patients and other health care professionals who >may >> >be mistakenly concerned about amalgam safety. >> Yes. Some write books to do that very thing. Like Tooth Truth by Dr >Frank >> Jerome. >Ahhhh, I see ...... >> >For the complete article, see the March issue of JADA. >> No thanks I think I have already seen enough. This is an opinion with >> absolutly NO proof. >OK >> Ding Ding.............back to round one. >> Jan >>--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >- >> >---- >> >Document Posted: March 2001 >> >Page Updated: March 01, 2001 >> >Document address: http://www.ada.org/prof/pubs/jada/0103/ab-6.html
Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:06:05 GMT

Page 1 of 1

[ 10 post ]