- Email: [email protected]
Audio analgesia
Audio analgesia
Within the past year a number of companies have introduced certain types of sound equipment which are purported to produce in patients a state of indifference to pain. This phenomenon is sometimes called “ audio analgesia,” a term which implies an action whose existence is yet to be established. Sound from a modified tape recorder or phonograph is provided to the patient through earphones. T he patient may re ceive sound of two types, music and masking sound, the ratio and the intensity of which he can control by himself. This masking sound, also called white sound, consists of a mixture of a wide range of sound frequencies which produce a roaring noise sometimes described as similar to that of a loud waterfall. T he music ordinarily is varied to suit the choice of the patient. T h e patient is instructed to increase the intensity of the music or masking sound or both when he feels pain. Although it is too early to determine whether these devices actually prevent or relieve pain, it is hoped that current research efforts soon will provide part of the necessary information. The clinical reports on these devices have been encouraging, and laboratory studies indicate that there m ay be a neurophysiological basis for their action. However, the enthusiasm for the phenomenon itself is accompanied by an apparent lack of recognition of the potential hazards involved in the use of these machines. T he factor of safety deserves careful consideration, for some of these devices m ay be capable of causing perm anent loss of hearing, either because of misuse or improper design. Both the intensity of the sound and the length of time in which it is applied to the ear are factors which determine the degree of hazard for a given individual. Some people are more prone to auditory dam age than others and it is important that a given device is safe for use on even the most susceptible individuals. T he Council on Dental Therapeutics currently is attempting to determine stand ards by which the safety of each make of device can be assessed. At the present time no such standards are available. Until means are available by which safety can be
EDITORIALS . . . VOLUME 61, NOVEMBER I960 • 99/617
determined, these devices may not be advertised in American Dental Association publications or exhibited at meetings sponsored by the Association. This policy is in accordance with rules established by the Association. Practicing dentists m ay wish to take a circumspect approach to the use of these sound devices on their patients.
National expenditures for dental and several other personal items
Recently t h e j o u r n a l reported editorially on a few 1960 appropriations made by the federal government for certain essential activities among which was an item of $7,000,000 designated for dental research.1The size of that sum in comparison with the billions appropriated for highways and the millions assigned for wildlife service appears to reflect sadly on our national leaders’ understanding of the country’s dental needs and the urgency of developing, through research, effective, inexpensive methods to reduce those needs. T h at this lack of perspective by federal authorities is but the reflection of public opinion an d attitude is evidenced by a report recently published by the Survey of Current Business.2 According to this report the U . S. Departm ent of Commerce estimates that consumer expenditures for dental care in 1959 were $1,963,000,000. Compare that sum with estimated consumer expenditures for other personal items during the same year: Tobacco products $ 7,034,000,000 Alcoholic beverages 9,600,000,000 Recreation 18,304,000,000 Personal care 4,661,000,000 Jewelry and watches 2,088,000,000 In short, last year, the American public spent approximately three times as much for tobacco, five times as much for liquor, nine times as much for recreation, twice as much for personal care and an equal amount for personal adornment as for dental health care. Furthermore it must be pointed out that the nation’s two billion dollar dental bill by no means met the dental health requirements of the American people, as less than half the population availed itself of dental service during the year. When the citizens of a so-called civilized nation regard dental care as far less important than many of their other budgetary items, it is perfectly understandable that their representatives in government share the same concept. I f this unfortunate and illogical viewpoint is to be changed, it is up to the dental profession to change it. T hat means more and better public dental health education beginning in the office of the general dental practitioner and extending through the offices of the local, state and national dental organizations. Only through educa tion can the status of a people or the state of a nation be raised. 1. Funds fo r research ¡n the fields of health. Editorial. J.A .D .A . 61:492 O ct. I960. 2. Survey o f Current Business, U. S. Department of Commerce July I960.
100/618 • THE JO U R N A L O F THE A M E R IC A N DENTAL A S S O C IA TIO N
Initially speaking: don’ t abbreviate
The careiess habit which many journalists have adopted in recent years of referring to organizations by initials rather than name is often confusing to the reader as well as embarrassing to the organization. A case in point is the use of the initials A.D.A. Within the dental family these well-known initials stand not only for the American Dental Association but for other dental organizations as well, including our neighbor to the north, the Alberta Dental Association, and the Australian Dental Association at the far end of the globe. Thus, unless the name of the organization is fully spelled out in the opening paragraphs of an article, the reader may be at a loss to know which organization is meant. In this country at least, the indiscriminate use of these initials in the public press is even more confusing as they represent a number of national organizations including the American Dental Association, the American Dairy Association, the American Dietetic Association and the Americans for Dem o cratic Action, a political organization which speaks out on many different national issues. No doubt there are many dentists who are members of the American Dairy Asso ciation and there are some who belong to the American Dietetic Association. Like wise there are some who subscribe to the political beliefs of the Americans for Demo cratic Action and others who do not. Therefore, as the American Dairy Association recently pointed out,1 when a news headline states, “ A.D.A. Blasts X Y Z Program,” dairy farm ers immediately think that it is their national organization that opposes the measure, dietitians think that it is theirs and dentists think that it is the American Dental Association. It has long been the policy of American Dental Association publications to use the initials A.D.A. as sparingly as possible, preferring to spell out the complete name of the organization or, if the occasion permits, using the single word “ Association.” It is recognized that news reporters, and particularly headline writers, face a tre mendous problem with some of the long organization names. Nevertheless many readers— dentists included— would be less confused if the initials A.D.A. were used more clearly. This lack of clearness becomes even more of a problem during periods of political cam paigning such as the one in which the nation is now engaged. Some dentists have rightfully become alarm ed upon reading that the A.D.A. has indorsed this candidate or that political policy. T he American Dental Association indorses no political candidate or no political cause. T he Association’s only interest in the na tional scene is in the enactment of legislation that will benefit the health of the American people.
I.
Editor and Publisher, Sept. 3, I960, p. 41.
EDITORIALS . . . VOLUME 61, NOVEMBER I960 • 101/619
Th e C o uncil on R e lie f ra ise s its s ig h t s — please raise yo u rs
Once again the season has arrived to initiate another Relief Fund Campaign. This year, for the first time since 1948, the Council on Relief has raised its goal twenty-five per cent, from $100,000 to $125,000, and increased each constituent society’s quota accordingly. The increase, which is several years overdue, has been necessitated by the increase in the cost of living plus a steady and perceptible increase in the number of relief recipients. Following are excerpts of a request sent by the Council on Relief to constituent and component society officers for aid in putting this year’s drive over the top. They are reproduced here as, in the final analysis, their appeal is directed to you and to other active members of the Association. A national goal of $125,000. . . . An average contribution of $5. . . . These are what the Council on Relief is seeking in the 1960-61 Relief Fund Cam paign. . . . Living costs are rising; relief fund grants are increasing— in number and size. T h at is why it has become necessary to increase the goal for the first time in the history of the campaigns. Every dollar of every contribution will still be used for relief. All administrative costs, all promotional costs are assumed by the Association. One half of every contribution from your society will be returned to your state relief fund. . . . In the 1959-60 campaign, only one out of every three active members con tributed. I f this figure is increased, and the average contribution is $5 we will meet and exceed our $125,000 goal. . . . Note that last year only one third of the Association’s active members donated to the Fund. Considering the worthiness of the cause and the distress experienced by certain unfortunate fellow practitioners, this is not an overly bright picture of generosity or humanitarianism. Try to influence at least two former noncontributors to the Fund to join with you in making this year’s Relief Cam paign one hundred per cent successful.
Within the past year a number of companies have introduced certain types of sound equipment which are purported to produce in patients a state of indifference to pain. This phenomenon is sometimes called “ audio analgesia,” a term which implies an action whose existence is yet to be established. Sound from a modified tape recorder or phonograph is provided to the patient through earphones. T he patient may re ceive sound of two types, music and masking sound, the ratio and the intensity of which he can control by himself. This masking sound, also called white sound, consists of a mixture of a wide range of sound frequencies which produce a roaring noise sometimes described as similar to that of a loud waterfall. T he music ordinarily is varied to suit the choice of the patient. T h e patient is instructed to increase the intensity of the music or masking sound or both when he feels pain. Although it is too early to determine whether these devices actually prevent or relieve pain, it is hoped that current research efforts soon will provide part of the necessary information. The clinical reports on these devices have been encouraging, and laboratory studies indicate that there m ay be a neurophysiological basis for their action. However, the enthusiasm for the phenomenon itself is accompanied by an apparent lack of recognition of the potential hazards involved in the use of these machines. T he factor of safety deserves careful consideration, for some of these devices m ay be capable of causing perm anent loss of hearing, either because of misuse or improper design. Both the intensity of the sound and the length of time in which it is applied to the ear are factors which determine the degree of hazard for a given individual. Some people are more prone to auditory dam age than others and it is important that a given device is safe for use on even the most susceptible individuals. T he Council on Dental Therapeutics currently is attempting to determine stand ards by which the safety of each make of device can be assessed. At the present time no such standards are available. Until means are available by which safety can be
EDITORIALS . . . VOLUME 61, NOVEMBER I960 • 99/617
determined, these devices may not be advertised in American Dental Association publications or exhibited at meetings sponsored by the Association. This policy is in accordance with rules established by the Association. Practicing dentists m ay wish to take a circumspect approach to the use of these sound devices on their patients.
National expenditures for dental and several other personal items
Recently t h e j o u r n a l reported editorially on a few 1960 appropriations made by the federal government for certain essential activities among which was an item of $7,000,000 designated for dental research.1The size of that sum in comparison with the billions appropriated for highways and the millions assigned for wildlife service appears to reflect sadly on our national leaders’ understanding of the country’s dental needs and the urgency of developing, through research, effective, inexpensive methods to reduce those needs. T h at this lack of perspective by federal authorities is but the reflection of public opinion an d attitude is evidenced by a report recently published by the Survey of Current Business.2 According to this report the U . S. Departm ent of Commerce estimates that consumer expenditures for dental care in 1959 were $1,963,000,000. Compare that sum with estimated consumer expenditures for other personal items during the same year: Tobacco products $ 7,034,000,000 Alcoholic beverages 9,600,000,000 Recreation 18,304,000,000 Personal care 4,661,000,000 Jewelry and watches 2,088,000,000 In short, last year, the American public spent approximately three times as much for tobacco, five times as much for liquor, nine times as much for recreation, twice as much for personal care and an equal amount for personal adornment as for dental health care. Furthermore it must be pointed out that the nation’s two billion dollar dental bill by no means met the dental health requirements of the American people, as less than half the population availed itself of dental service during the year. When the citizens of a so-called civilized nation regard dental care as far less important than many of their other budgetary items, it is perfectly understandable that their representatives in government share the same concept. I f this unfortunate and illogical viewpoint is to be changed, it is up to the dental profession to change it. T hat means more and better public dental health education beginning in the office of the general dental practitioner and extending through the offices of the local, state and national dental organizations. Only through educa tion can the status of a people or the state of a nation be raised. 1. Funds fo r research ¡n the fields of health. Editorial. J.A .D .A . 61:492 O ct. I960. 2. Survey o f Current Business, U. S. Department of Commerce July I960.
100/618 • THE JO U R N A L O F THE A M E R IC A N DENTAL A S S O C IA TIO N
Initially speaking: don’ t abbreviate
The careiess habit which many journalists have adopted in recent years of referring to organizations by initials rather than name is often confusing to the reader as well as embarrassing to the organization. A case in point is the use of the initials A.D.A. Within the dental family these well-known initials stand not only for the American Dental Association but for other dental organizations as well, including our neighbor to the north, the Alberta Dental Association, and the Australian Dental Association at the far end of the globe. Thus, unless the name of the organization is fully spelled out in the opening paragraphs of an article, the reader may be at a loss to know which organization is meant. In this country at least, the indiscriminate use of these initials in the public press is even more confusing as they represent a number of national organizations including the American Dental Association, the American Dairy Association, the American Dietetic Association and the Americans for Dem o cratic Action, a political organization which speaks out on many different national issues. No doubt there are many dentists who are members of the American Dairy Asso ciation and there are some who belong to the American Dietetic Association. Like wise there are some who subscribe to the political beliefs of the Americans for Demo cratic Action and others who do not. Therefore, as the American Dairy Association recently pointed out,1 when a news headline states, “ A.D.A. Blasts X Y Z Program,” dairy farm ers immediately think that it is their national organization that opposes the measure, dietitians think that it is theirs and dentists think that it is the American Dental Association. It has long been the policy of American Dental Association publications to use the initials A.D.A. as sparingly as possible, preferring to spell out the complete name of the organization or, if the occasion permits, using the single word “ Association.” It is recognized that news reporters, and particularly headline writers, face a tre mendous problem with some of the long organization names. Nevertheless many readers— dentists included— would be less confused if the initials A.D.A. were used more clearly. This lack of clearness becomes even more of a problem during periods of political cam paigning such as the one in which the nation is now engaged. Some dentists have rightfully become alarm ed upon reading that the A.D.A. has indorsed this candidate or that political policy. T he American Dental Association indorses no political candidate or no political cause. T he Association’s only interest in the na tional scene is in the enactment of legislation that will benefit the health of the American people.
I.
Editor and Publisher, Sept. 3, I960, p. 41.
EDITORIALS . . . VOLUME 61, NOVEMBER I960 • 101/619
Th e C o uncil on R e lie f ra ise s its s ig h t s — please raise yo u rs
Once again the season has arrived to initiate another Relief Fund Campaign. This year, for the first time since 1948, the Council on Relief has raised its goal twenty-five per cent, from $100,000 to $125,000, and increased each constituent society’s quota accordingly. The increase, which is several years overdue, has been necessitated by the increase in the cost of living plus a steady and perceptible increase in the number of relief recipients. Following are excerpts of a request sent by the Council on Relief to constituent and component society officers for aid in putting this year’s drive over the top. They are reproduced here as, in the final analysis, their appeal is directed to you and to other active members of the Association. A national goal of $125,000. . . . An average contribution of $5. . . . These are what the Council on Relief is seeking in the 1960-61 Relief Fund Cam paign. . . . Living costs are rising; relief fund grants are increasing— in number and size. T h at is why it has become necessary to increase the goal for the first time in the history of the campaigns. Every dollar of every contribution will still be used for relief. All administrative costs, all promotional costs are assumed by the Association. One half of every contribution from your society will be returned to your state relief fund. . . . In the 1959-60 campaign, only one out of every three active members con tributed. I f this figure is increased, and the average contribution is $5 we will meet and exceed our $125,000 goal. . . . Note that last year only one third of the Association’s active members donated to the Fund. Considering the worthiness of the cause and the distress experienced by certain unfortunate fellow practitioners, this is not an overly bright picture of generosity or humanitarianism. Try to influence at least two former noncontributors to the Fund to join with you in making this year’s Relief Cam paign one hundred per cent successful.