- Email: [email protected]
The prevention issue
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
THE JOURNAL devotes this section to comment by readers on topics of current interest to den tistry. The editor reserves the right to edit all communications to fit available space and requires that all letters be signed. Printed communications do not necessarily reflect the opinion or of ficial policy of the Association. Your participation in this section is invited.
T he prevention issue m Prevention will indeed prevail!
It is truly unfortunate that such an excellent issue of t h e j o u r n a l (July 1974) had to be preceded by such a disparaging editorial. “ To protect and pursue the substance of prevention” is most noble. I presume that the thousands who are totally committed to the philoso phy of prevention and have worked diligently toward its furtherance re sent, as I, being referred to as paraders generating hoopla, led by a loud and gaudy bandwagon, listening to a pro motional pitch at high volume by a handful of proselytizing “ evan gelists,” and meeting success through charisma and salesmanship while ballyhooing our gimmickry. In his paper, “ The patient’s needs,” Thomas B. Hartzell states that “ it necessarily follows that to pre vent dental disease is the greatest task confronting the dentist today.” He goes on to state: “ Our job as the den tal profession, therefore, is an educa tional one. In olden times, the word ‘doctor’ meant teacher. Let us in the profession of dentistry revive that meaning—dentist, teacher, physician. Let us all become teachers, teachers of health. We must teach them that the immediate cause of dental disease is the product of bacteria growing on the teeth. . . . ” Dr. Hartzell’s paper was published in the j a d a in October 1930 and con
tains virtually all there is to say about mechanical plaque control. This ar ticle was brought to the attention of thousands by Paul Keyes who, to my knowledge, has never been accused of being a parader, and so forth. It is a genuine pleasure to note that our A D A finally has concluded there is a need for “ emphasis on preven tion.” Missing the boat in 1930 gives you little license to discredit those who have led you to the dock. C. A. AM ENTA, JR ., DDS CHICAGO
■ I have just finished reading the July and I just cannot compromise your editorial, “ Prevention will pre vail,” with the articles that you chose to publish touting prevention. On one hand, you say that “ pre vention should no longer be consid ered to begin and end with plaque control.” Then you devote a great deal of space on THETA and the A D A publications which deal pri marily with plaque, oral hygiene, and plaque pamphlets. The view on nutri tion is so old hat as to make one won der why you took the time to publish it. You had a better one two years ago. We knew that chewing fluoride tablets was worthless years ago. The articles on sealants are nothing new. Had you published one stating that sealants are economic losses to the dentist and a rip-off to the patient, then you would be doing the profes sion a service. It is time that dentists are told that ja d a ,
sealants are useless for the long-range control of caries. By the second year, 90% of them are lost. The patient has paid for a misrepresented service. The dentist is faced with the choice of re applying it free, or to do the tested procedure of placing an amalgam fil ling which will last indefinitely, and for which only one charge is made. The more teeth have been hardened by fluorides, the less etch and the poorer the retention of sealants. These are not good products to use in den tistry. Were any other product so prone to failure and poor service, the Council on Dental Therapeutics would damn it with a ban. The j a d a is most useful to dentistry when it publishes articles which pro vide new ideas and techniques for the practicing dentist. We do not have time to wade through tedious research articles, boring public health articles, and reviews of subjects which have been reviewed so many times that we have heard it all before. E DW ARD O. SHANER, DDS BETHESDA, MD
■ I would like to congratulate you on the theme and content of the July j a d a . With this issue of t h e j o u r n a l , I feel that the A D A , after many tenta tive moves, finally has made a major step in placing the necessary emphasis on preventive dentistry. However, your editorial on page 12, “ Prevention will prevail,” confuses me. After reading it, I was left with the impression that you believe now that the primary advocates of preven tion—the “ evangelists,” as you put it—have lost their influence, we can succeed in making prevention work. Could you possibly have meant that now when the Barkleys, the Reeds, the Corns, and all the others who have been the preventive educators and motivators in this country for the last several years have managed to “ promote” preventive dentistry to such a degree and to focus the “ spot light” on it for so long that it can no longer be ignored, now the A D A is ready to step into its rightful place as leader of the dental profession and to guide the rest of the profession into prevention? If that’s what you meant, I heartily JADA, Vol. 89, Septem ber 1974 ■ 531
THE JOURNAL devotes this section to comment by readers on topics of current interest to den tistry. The editor reserves the right to edit all communications to fit available space and requires that all letters be signed. Printed communications do not necessarily reflect the opinion or of ficial policy of the Association. Your participation in this section is invited.
T he prevention issue m Prevention will indeed prevail!
It is truly unfortunate that such an excellent issue of t h e j o u r n a l (July 1974) had to be preceded by such a disparaging editorial. “ To protect and pursue the substance of prevention” is most noble. I presume that the thousands who are totally committed to the philoso phy of prevention and have worked diligently toward its furtherance re sent, as I, being referred to as paraders generating hoopla, led by a loud and gaudy bandwagon, listening to a pro motional pitch at high volume by a handful of proselytizing “ evan gelists,” and meeting success through charisma and salesmanship while ballyhooing our gimmickry. In his paper, “ The patient’s needs,” Thomas B. Hartzell states that “ it necessarily follows that to pre vent dental disease is the greatest task confronting the dentist today.” He goes on to state: “ Our job as the den tal profession, therefore, is an educa tional one. In olden times, the word ‘doctor’ meant teacher. Let us in the profession of dentistry revive that meaning—dentist, teacher, physician. Let us all become teachers, teachers of health. We must teach them that the immediate cause of dental disease is the product of bacteria growing on the teeth. . . . ” Dr. Hartzell’s paper was published in the j a d a in October 1930 and con
tains virtually all there is to say about mechanical plaque control. This ar ticle was brought to the attention of thousands by Paul Keyes who, to my knowledge, has never been accused of being a parader, and so forth. It is a genuine pleasure to note that our A D A finally has concluded there is a need for “ emphasis on preven tion.” Missing the boat in 1930 gives you little license to discredit those who have led you to the dock. C. A. AM ENTA, JR ., DDS CHICAGO
■ I have just finished reading the July and I just cannot compromise your editorial, “ Prevention will pre vail,” with the articles that you chose to publish touting prevention. On one hand, you say that “ pre vention should no longer be consid ered to begin and end with plaque control.” Then you devote a great deal of space on THETA and the A D A publications which deal pri marily with plaque, oral hygiene, and plaque pamphlets. The view on nutri tion is so old hat as to make one won der why you took the time to publish it. You had a better one two years ago. We knew that chewing fluoride tablets was worthless years ago. The articles on sealants are nothing new. Had you published one stating that sealants are economic losses to the dentist and a rip-off to the patient, then you would be doing the profes sion a service. It is time that dentists are told that ja d a ,
sealants are useless for the long-range control of caries. By the second year, 90% of them are lost. The patient has paid for a misrepresented service. The dentist is faced with the choice of re applying it free, or to do the tested procedure of placing an amalgam fil ling which will last indefinitely, and for which only one charge is made. The more teeth have been hardened by fluorides, the less etch and the poorer the retention of sealants. These are not good products to use in den tistry. Were any other product so prone to failure and poor service, the Council on Dental Therapeutics would damn it with a ban. The j a d a is most useful to dentistry when it publishes articles which pro vide new ideas and techniques for the practicing dentist. We do not have time to wade through tedious research articles, boring public health articles, and reviews of subjects which have been reviewed so many times that we have heard it all before. E DW ARD O. SHANER, DDS BETHESDA, MD
■ I would like to congratulate you on the theme and content of the July j a d a . With this issue of t h e j o u r n a l , I feel that the A D A , after many tenta tive moves, finally has made a major step in placing the necessary emphasis on preventive dentistry. However, your editorial on page 12, “ Prevention will prevail,” confuses me. After reading it, I was left with the impression that you believe now that the primary advocates of preven tion—the “ evangelists,” as you put it—have lost their influence, we can succeed in making prevention work. Could you possibly have meant that now when the Barkleys, the Reeds, the Corns, and all the others who have been the preventive educators and motivators in this country for the last several years have managed to “ promote” preventive dentistry to such a degree and to focus the “ spot light” on it for so long that it can no longer be ignored, now the A D A is ready to step into its rightful place as leader of the dental profession and to guide the rest of the profession into prevention? If that’s what you meant, I heartily JADA, Vol. 89, Septem ber 1974 ■ 531