I said that I wouldn't rise to the bait (but I knew that I would
).
There have been a number of really good questions raised and I will respond to some of them.
First, regarding the movement of the teeth. Yes, it is possible that the loss of a tooth in one arch can actually cause the loss of other teeth on the opposite side and in the other arch. The teeth aren't anchored in the bone in the sense that a nail is anchored in a board. They are suspended in the bony socket by microscopic ligaments that are ruptured when the tooth is extracted. Additionally each tooth helps to support its neighbors by its contact with them. When a tooth is removed, that support is destroyed. When that contact is lost, then it becomes a food trap with the resulting decay and gum disease. Whether the adjacent teeth will move and how much and how quickly depends upon many factors; the age of the patient when the tooth is lost, the amount of gum disease present, the occlusion of the remaining teeth, etc.
Regarding the inevitable loss of a tooth/teeth: It is no more reasonable today to think that teeth will ultimately be lost than it is to think that our fingers will ultimately be lost. Tooth loss is not a natural process. With the exception of an accident, the loss is due to neglect of long duration. The destruction of either the supporting structures (gum disease) or the tooth structure (caries) is preventable. With fluoridation and proper home care, decay (caries) has practically been eliminated in children today. With education and periodic professional care gum (periodontal) disease can be prevented.
The fact that our parents or grandparents lost teeth or had dentures is no reason to believe that we or our children or grand children need to suffer the same disease. The dental profession is one of the few professions which has worked diligently to put itself out of business (Whew, wish attorneys, architects, accountants, etc could say that!
).
A note about the survivability of dental restorations: Think of it this way...to think that any dentist is going to construct some replacement device in your mouth that will be superior to a sound and healthy tooth is pretty unrealistic. I was comfortable in thinking that I was a pretty good dentist but I wasn't foolish enough to think that I was better than the good Lord in replacing what He had originally provided!
And finally a thought about dental costs: Modern dentistry IS expensive. As a retired dentist, I am amazed at how much more a treatment costs than when I began practice 50 years ago. Of course, everything material that we seek costs more also. In today's WSJ the statement is made that the average student graduates from college with $27,000 in student loans. I recently learned that, on top of that college loan, a recent graduate from my dental school has an average outstanding loan balance of $270,000 and many of the graduates exceed $300,000 from dental school.
Sorry for the long post but just some random thoughts to help put things into perspective.
Bob
).There have been a number of really good questions raised and I will respond to some of them.
First, regarding the movement of the teeth. Yes, it is possible that the loss of a tooth in one arch can actually cause the loss of other teeth on the opposite side and in the other arch. The teeth aren't anchored in the bone in the sense that a nail is anchored in a board. They are suspended in the bony socket by microscopic ligaments that are ruptured when the tooth is extracted. Additionally each tooth helps to support its neighbors by its contact with them. When a tooth is removed, that support is destroyed. When that contact is lost, then it becomes a food trap with the resulting decay and gum disease. Whether the adjacent teeth will move and how much and how quickly depends upon many factors; the age of the patient when the tooth is lost, the amount of gum disease present, the occlusion of the remaining teeth, etc.
Regarding the inevitable loss of a tooth/teeth: It is no more reasonable today to think that teeth will ultimately be lost than it is to think that our fingers will ultimately be lost. Tooth loss is not a natural process. With the exception of an accident, the loss is due to neglect of long duration. The destruction of either the supporting structures (gum disease) or the tooth structure (caries) is preventable. With fluoridation and proper home care, decay (caries) has practically been eliminated in children today. With education and periodic professional care gum (periodontal) disease can be prevented.
The fact that our parents or grandparents lost teeth or had dentures is no reason to believe that we or our children or grand children need to suffer the same disease. The dental profession is one of the few professions which has worked diligently to put itself out of business (Whew, wish attorneys, architects, accountants, etc could say that!
).A note about the survivability of dental restorations: Think of it this way...to think that any dentist is going to construct some replacement device in your mouth that will be superior to a sound and healthy tooth is pretty unrealistic. I was comfortable in thinking that I was a pretty good dentist but I wasn't foolish enough to think that I was better than the good Lord in replacing what He had originally provided!
And finally a thought about dental costs: Modern dentistry IS expensive. As a retired dentist, I am amazed at how much more a treatment costs than when I began practice 50 years ago. Of course, everything material that we seek costs more also. In today's WSJ the statement is made that the average student graduates from college with $27,000 in student loans. I recently learned that, on top of that college loan, a recent graduate from my dental school has an average outstanding loan balance of $270,000 and many of the graduates exceed $300,000 from dental school.
Sorry for the long post but just some random thoughts to help put things into perspective.
Bob
