Bloody Dentists

Teeth on my mind today. First off, Margo has been having an unhappy experience with a dentist:

Just what I needed today, Frank – have had the most depressing and angry-making visit to the dentist, who waits till I’m trapped with my mouth full of his gear and then gives me the spiel about how I’m going to lose all my teeth and, when that’s happened, my gums will not heal – and it’s all my own fault because I smoke. And implants will not be an option because no dentist that he knows will put these into a smoker’s mouth. And, anyway, years of smoking have done too much damage. (The same damage most of my family have suffered, both the smokers and the non-smokers – but anything I say falls on deaf ears.) What is one to do?

What indeed is one to do? Sympathy poured in from all quarters, and Margo went on to write:

Oh thank you, it does, it does cheer me up. I knew there was something about nicotine helping healing – and tobacco has been used for this over centuries. My dentist was just spewing out the ‘Dentists Bible’, I knew that. I did have a go at him afterwards, as far as I could – and I know I have to go back for more treatment a few times. I said, ‘Can we take it as read, now, and you don’t do this lecture every time I come?’ And he said, ‘No – I will be doing it every time’. Unbelievable. I came home fuming with rage. But I should just laugh, really, I think.
Thanks for your experiences, HR. It’s a bummer, isn’t it. I put my problem down to: age (over 70), family inheritance, bad or non-existent dentistry all my childhood, poor nutrition over several years, ignorance for a long time about how to look after my teeth, stress, a certain amount of wild living, all in the past now. Smoking? I don’t fucking believe it, and Frank is right – the dentist is a liar. Thanks to everyone. You’ve really helped,

Sounds like a really poisonous little shit. She continued:

jltrader, yes, “every illness known to man is ’caused’ by smoking”, but only if you smoke. A few years ago, I was moving huge breeze-blocks in the garden, wearing sandals (yes, I know) and managed to drop one, flat on my big toe. I hobbled to the doc (really, just to see if I should get an X-ray or something) and he said, ‘It’s definitely broken.’
Next thing I knew, a few days later an appointment came for me to visit the Low Bone Density Clinic. I phoned up to ask why, and the doc said, ‘Well, since you smoke, you’ve probably got low bone density, which is why your toe broke.’
So I said, ‘I DROPPED A BRICK ON IT!’
“Oh, did you?” he said. He hadn’t taken that bit in – he’d just focused on the word Smoker, which unfortunately is on my records. If you’re a smoker, there are no other causes whatsoever for any malady you might suffer.

Margo is over 70, and really these people have no business lecturing someone of her age. What’s the point, other than sheer vindictiveness?

It set me wondering if there might be other ways people might help Margo other than offering sympathy. If, for example, we knew who this dentist was and where he worked, we’d probably be able to find out his email address, and write to him to complain about his conduct. Equally, we might write and complain about him to his superiors in the NHS. Or the local MP. And so on.

I’m not actually suggesting that we do this. I’m just airing the possibility. But a blog like mine is being read by a whole bunch of like-minded people, and they might want to help Margo. And maybe it’s possible for them to help in all sorts of ways. People may have their own suggestions.

Anyway, the other reason teeth are on my mind is that one of my teeth broke yesterday. It was a 30-year-old crown, and it broke while I was eating a cheese roll. I’ve already got one NHS plastic front tooth, and it looks like its going to gain a companion. Because I’ve got an NHS dentist too, and a couple of years back I also got given an antismoking lecture by a hygienist. I answered back, of course. And I just laughed at her when the stupid woman said that smoking was “naughty”. As a result I have an idea that I may be on a Do Not Treat list, because treatment has been a bit perfunctory ever since. Anyway, I shall soon be finding out where I stand.

And now Lauren Bacall is dead. It’s surprising that it was nearly 60 years ago that Humphrey Bogart died. Seems like only yesterday they were on screen together (and married).

Advertisements

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

72 Responses to Bloody Dentists

  1. I loathe dentists. I am fortunate to have had fairly bullet-proof teeth, no issues other than cleanings in over 30 years, but the last one I frequented soured me so much with his smoking lecture that I never went back, and I can’t say I’m particularly interested in finding a new one… It wasn’t just the lecture; he insisted on replacing a few old fillings (which were fine) and as a consequence totally fucked up the shape of a some of my rear molars and the way teeth meet up, such that I now get pain in my jaw when I clench my teeth… Not going out of my way or paying money to get a lecture and have my mouth fucked up for no good reason.

    Unfortunate to hear about Margo’s experience – really what is the point for people in the medical community to shame anyone or make them feel less than noble for trying to take care of themselves? It’s stressful enough having a stranger or two huddled over your face, sticking fingers and instruments in your mouth, probe you, move you around in ways that aren’t particularly comfortable. What’s to be accomplished by making someone even more stressed?

    Good luck with your tooth, Frank!

  2. jariel says:

    Teeth have been on my mind, too. Mainly because I had ’em all pulled out two weeks ago, along with having a bunch of bones taken out and/or shaved down. (Shudder – one of my biggest fears – being toothless – IT HAPPENED. IT’S HERE). My teeth were falling out, first one by one, then two by two, then three got lost in a tomato, etc. – and my gums were a mess, and all because of awful unceasing dry mouth caused by an antidepressant which I’ve been on since it came out about 20 years ago. 20 years ago I had perfect, cavity-free teeth. Of course, 20 years ago nobody knew that people on this particular med would eventually lose their teeth, but they’re finding out now. Whoopee. Oh, and I’m kinda up there in age – 65 next month. (Shudder – one of my biggest fears – being old – IT HAPPENED. IT’S HERE)
    Anyway, I have been getting smoking lectures right and left. My mental health support person, an ex-smoker who’s turned into an Antismoker Vaper (otherwise a great guy) told me over and over again that I needed to quit smoking a week before the oral surgery and not smoke for two weeks afterwards or I’d get the dreaded DRY SOCKET. My doctor told me to quit smoking a week before and after the oral surgery or I’d get DRY SOCKET. My friends nagged me to stop smoking because I’d get DRY SOCKET, and besides, smoking is nasty anyway and this is a perfect time for me to quit. Of course, the oral surgeon told me to not smoke for a week before and after the surgery – because I’d get DRY SOCKET.
    I have dentalphobia. I was a nervous wreck for at least two weeks before the procedure. And I’m not gonna smoke? HAH!
    My surgery was at 8:15 AM. It took two hours. I spent the rest of the day in bed, knocked out on pain pills and the remnant effects of the IV sedation. I smoked at 9 PM. It felt great.
    I DID NOT GET DRY SOCKET.
    At my follow-up appointment the oral surgeon told me I was healing remarkably quickly and well – so quickly and well, in fact, that he cancelled my next follow-up appointment.
    Could it be because I smoked?
    Why is it that the people I know who’ve had DRY SOCKET are all non-smokers?

    I can’t wait until July when I get teeth again. Fake ones, but at least I’ll want to smile again.

    Oh, by the way, I got a weirdly obnoxious antismoking comment the other day.
    It was after services and I was standing outside the synagogue smoking. One of the congregants was leaving so I said, “Good night,” to him, and he said, “You shouldn’t smoke. It’s not nice.”

    Actually it doesn’t look as weirdly obnoxious written down as it was when he said it.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Had one dry socket lower left once,hurts like bloody hell for 2 months had to put mini cotton balls with oil of clove on it to deaden the pain. Took about 6 weeks to get over.

      So I been lucky so far only top being yanked something I decided to do after they started breaking off and literally becoming infected left and right. Ive had 7 taken out in the last 2 months and 2 in just the last 2 weeks. It takes a week just to get over the tissue tears from the multiple injections for numbing.

      5 more to go and their all out and then an econo denture for 3 months and I go back to the dreaded VA and get a form fitted denture plate and or implants. That’s if the bastards will get it done. My father in law had his implants done 4 years ago and finally they called him 3 months ago and said your teeth are ready………..

      With service like that its part of why I quit even going. 4-6 month appointment times and meanwhile your teeth rot out.

      They sent me to the VA in Nashville to have a tooth pulled that the damn dentist in Clarksville could have pulled that day yet was scared to do it………

      So I had to wait a week for oral surgeons to remove a tooth he could have pulled. I got their 1 hour early checked in and was the 3rd guy in line to be seen. Guess what 12 people later and 3 hours go by and still haven’t been called back yet I said 1 more person goes in Im fuckin out of here………..they called back another before me again. I threw the check in paper in the bytches face and said keep it who needs fucking nothing……….

      I left and went str8 to a private dentist 12 miles from the house he got me right in and had the tooth out in 15 minutes after numbing no wait no BS just in and out…………I been going to see him ever since. Its the same way at VA dental everytime you go I sat one afternoon needing 2 pulled and waited 4 hours and 32 people later only to get told as the last man in the room that everyone was already leaving for home!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • jariel says:

        I’m on disability, and receive Medicare and Medicaid. My income is extremely low. Guess what? They both WILL NOT APPROVE approximately 98 percent of oral surgery. Only one oral surgeon in my area accepts Medicaid, and will not accept Medicare. I went to see him and Medicaid denied everything except for the extraction of one tooth. Denied the very necessary bone surgery. Denied anything having to do with my gums. Didn’t matter that I couldn’t chew. Didn’t matter that I was in constant severe pain from mouth-wide infection. Didn’t matter that my teeth were crumbling and falling out. And they don’t approve dentures. This is why you see a lot of low-income people, especially the seniors, who have either no or very few teeth.
        The free clinic here will extract teeth but will not do further oral surgery. And they won’t give you any sedation, which makes it impossible for someone like me, with horrible dentalphobia and a low pain threshhold, to get dental work done there.
        There is a dental/oral program in my state for low-income people, in which dentists and oral surgeons donate their services. They will use sedation. They will also give you dentures. You have to apply. They accept very few people. The waiting list is from two to four years. And you usually have to travel a few hundred miles to get the procedures done.
        I had been trying to get oral surgery services for three years. Ran up against wall after wall after wall. My self-esteem has never been the best, and the way I looked when I smiled was pretty darn scary to me. Only one tooth in front, and that one looked like a brown isosceles triangle. So I stopped smiling. I especially didn’t want to gross out the children I work with in religious school. And my chronic depression got worse and worse and worse, because I was in never-ending pain, it was difficult to eat and maintain a healthy weight, I felt hopeless and, yes, ugly, and was so aware of the social stigma carried by missing, snaggly, brown front teeth… and to this a big helping of Smokers’ Stigma – oh, it was terrible…
        FINALLY – after three years, and friends and mental health professionals advocating on my behalf (and I LOVE them for this!) an excellent, and extremely kind, oral surgeon donated his services. Another excellent and extremely kind dentist gave me a free exam, consulted with the oral surgeon, and is donating dentures.
        I am very lucky. And my heart goes out to those low-income individuals who are suffering with long-term severe dental problems.

      • beobrigitte says:

        Harley, did you by any chance use a mouth wash thus remove the “blood plug” after the tooth was taken out?
        This “blood plug” is important – it helps to form bone …

        Years ago I took drastic action – I just had had enough of spending nights with my face on my kitchen floor (ceramic tiles, COLD!), waiting for my face to swell up and many hours later a yellow dot to appear on my gum that I could stab and release the pressure and pain – I asked for the worst affected teeth to be removed. In one session. The dentist was reluctant to remove “healthy-looking” teeth and suggested more removals of the tip of the roots. Been there, done it, have enough scars on my gum from it. And, it didn’t work most of the time. I got new abscesses….
        It totalled 8 teeth – and when I drove home, I lit my cigarette. For the next 48 hours I did not brush the rest of my teeth and ate only soup. (Spoon in mouth —-> swallow) Within 3 days I was fine and the dentist suggested implants. But, because I am a smoker the NHS wouldn’t pay towards them, but he would do these implants for me if I paid for them.
        So he got a colleague (some sort of ‘expert’) out to check me over. This guy was harping on about how ‘wonderful’ my jaw bones were, so I asked again – since I turned out to be a prime candidate for implants – how much the NHS would pay towards them. The answer was the same: NO MONEY FOR SMOKERS’ IMPLANTS.
        So I did reply that in this case I shall take my business elsewhere. The guy quoted me £12 000 for the implants; my son’s partner told me her family dentist does them for £3000 – £5000.
        Ironically, if the NHS had paid 40% of the cost, I’d have happily paid the remaining £7000 out of my pocket.

        ANTI-SMOKING CAUSES MATHS TO REVERT TO PRE-SCHOOL LEVEL.

        Never had dry socket. I must say, the people I know who had ‘dry socket’ were all non-smokers. One of them a sibling of mine. It took a long time (and drastic dental treatment, apparently) to heal.

    • Some other Tom says:

      When I had my last wisdom tooth pulled I was warned of the same thing, in addition to drinking anything with a straw… I smoked later that day and never got dry socket either…

    • waltc says:

      Yes it does. And in case this shows up way down there someplace I mean it looks just as obnoxious in print. Next time remind him it’s even not-nicer to mouth off to strangers.

      • Frank Davis says:

        I said, “Good night,” to him, and he said, “You shouldn’t smoke. It’s not nice.” Actually it doesn’t look as weirdly obnoxious written down as it was when he said it.

        I’m with Walt. I think that’s really obnoxious. Particularly in response to a benign remark. What he said was “not nice”.

    • Statistically (and it looked reasonable when I researched it) smoking increases the chances of dry socket dramatically … like maybe 300% if my memory is right.

      BUT… what the dentists DON’T tell you… is that the base rate is maybe something like 2%. So smoking would then increase the risk to 6%. (I’m not really sure about these numbers: it’s been a while since I looked that all up… I think I’m in the ballpark on it though).

      Meanwhile, I know that at one place in TNacht I looked at the claim that smoking around children would destroy their gums and their would fall out. I tracked that down and read the study, and it turned out that DESPITE THE HEADLINES, there was no one smoking around children. What the researchers did was take baby mutant hairless rats, slice open their gums to make “wounds,” then stitched the gums up and sent the rats off to cages for a week or three. Meanwhile half the baby rats were subjected to concentrated clouds of smoke three times a day equivalent to your little Darlin’ Donnie or Debbie living in a home with an evil stepmother who smoke SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND CIGARETTES PER DAY!

      Seriously.

      And after all that, the rats who’d been smoke tortured every day didn’t heal up quite as well as the ones who’d been off vacationing in fresh air.

      In absolutely NONE of the worldwide news stories about this “threat to children” did ANY of the reporters even MENTION that the study was done on baby rats instead of human children, nor was there any mention of the concentrations of smoke involved.

      Is Margo going back to that dentist? I could email her (or post it here) the full analysis. She could show up with one of the harder hitting news stories and say, “Dr, is THIS what you were talking about?” And then, when he says, “Yes! Now you see why I’m warning you!” … she could take out the analysis and say “Well read THIS SUCKER!!!!”

      :>
      MJM
      P.S. Technically, it’s not the smoke that causes the dry socket: it’s the suction. They discovered the same problem with sipping through soda straws.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Exactly Mike and the same reason so called ”APPLE CORES” come about with soda pop. When you drink it crosses over the mid top teeth almost exclusively and it does it damage.

        I had dry socket but it was because I sucked the wound at nite in my sleep not even realizing it…………

      • jariel says:

        Oh, my goodness, the poor little ratties!!! (I have pet rats)

        • beobrigitte says:

          My offspring did bless me with pet rats years ago – my initial response soon changed when I did care for them. They are as affectionate as cats and dogs.
          “Basil”, when out on his daily wondering about, first visited the cat’s bowl ( cat be there or not) to fill his face, before casually mooching about the place. When it was time to get back in the cage, all I had to do was call his name.
          He never nibbled on any skirt board etc. and when bored/tired, he climbed on my lap/shoulders to be put back into his cage.

          I gues, on my shoulders he was a passive smoker. Never bothered him. He lived into his 5th year.

        • Frank Davis says:

          I think that’s clear scientific evidence that passive smoking extends rat lifetimes by 100%.

        • beobrigitte says:

          It is something worth keeping note of. Our ‘Dumbo rat’ (see comment below) did make it to 18 month before getting the ear infections this breed is prone to. My vet just said that we were lucky that ‘Drako’ did reach the age of ca. 18 months before getting it.

          Perhaps 2 people at the time smoking around the rat did help?

      • margo says:

        MJM, I would really like you to email an analysis for me to take with me next time – brilliant – or post here, whichever you prefer – something to give an idea of how these studies are done, as I touched on this in our heated ‘discussion’ last time, but didn’t have anything to back my point up with (I remember saying, ‘show me the studies and I’ll find you the flaw’, a challenge he didn’t rise to!).

      • Some French bloke says:

        Statistically (and it looked reasonable when I researched it) smoking increases the chances of dry socket dramatically

        Diagnostic bias is probably unlikely in the case of alveolar osteitis (dry socket) but, it not being a deadly condition, they have had to use purely clinical data that is not as systematic as death certificates, so picking some convenient ones must have been a breeze. Does not this 1998 study state that “Smoking did not increase the incidence of alveolar osteitis relative to not smoking (odds ratio = 1.20, p = 0.33)”?
        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9574945

        In the case of lung cancer, reams of international statistics enable us to search for secular trends that would match the plummeting smoking prevalences of the last half century, and in spite of the claim of an enormously increased risk for smokers (x20 or more), it’s not difficult to come up with numbers that would prove the exact opposite, using the exact same ‘logic’ as the anti-smokers. Stable smoking rates can ‘result’ in declining LC rates in countries which had until very recently been spared by the antismoking pandemic, while other salient discrepancies include the always divergent, even sometimes opposite, trends in men vs women (that IMHO also challenge the fall-out theory).

        In addition to “what the dentists DON’T tell you” (the low base rate), there’s what the statisticians certainly failed to check for, e.g.: did they mention a spectacular decrease in dry socket prevalence over the last few decades as additional proof, or did they have to invoke a lag time (why not 40 to 60 years, just to be on the safe side?), or even resort to age-adjusted numbers? More likely they avoided the issue altogether. Poisoners of the collective psyche is what those scoundrels are.

        • Thanks for the details: it might not be as supported as I thought. It’s interesting that the excess ratio for women using birthcontrol (1.92 , i.e. an excess of 92%) is over four times the excess for smoking (1.20 , i.e. an excess of 20%) — although neither of them was statistically significant.

  3. cherie79 says:

    I have had no problem with my dentist but that was likely because he is private! Dont know why but since my husband died I just kept losing teeth and eventually had the last of the top ones out. I did consider implants but at my age it seemed a waste of money I would rather leave to my grandchildren. I found it very hard to tolerate a plastic denture but found a chrome one fine and recommend it. As far as Drs. go I tell them from the start I want no lectures, at my age I am entitled to be left alone and I have no wish or intention to stop smoking, so far they accept that. Of course whatever kills me it will be ‘smoking related’ unless the I sanity passes.

    • Rose says:

      Yes, Cherie I have no problem with my dentist either and I’m private too, but I did have get a few gentle remarks from a new dentist at the same practice like it was something I didn’t know, however they were so general that they were equally gently countered , i.e. nicotine is a vasoconstrictor – nitric oxide is a vasodilator.

      But it’s tedious and I don’t need it.

      • beobrigitte says:

        I guess, being a smoker, I’m now private, too.

        But I’m not prepared to listen to anti-smokers’ lectures, so I take it a step further: MY MONEY FOR DENTAL TREATMENT GOES OUT OF THIS COUNTRY.

        They do not need smokers’ money as they do not need smokers’ votes?

        • jariel says:

          Beobrigitte – there was no “reply” link under your comment about the beloved Basil, so I’m replying here. Yes, ratties are indeed affectionate and sweet, as well as pretty darn smart. He lived almost till his 5th year? That is EXTREMELY rare!! I’ve had pet rats for about 15 years now, and the oldest rats I ever had lived to be just over 3. Most start going downhill at about 2 – whether or not they’re the pets of a smoker. I know many people who have pet rats (was involved in breeding clubs for a while) and have gotten stern lectures from quite a few of them about how I should quit smoking for the sake of the rattttie chiiilllldren. Well, my poor little second-hand-smoking rats have lived just as long as, and often longer than, the pet rats of my non-smoking acquaintances, and for some reason they’ve had an unusually small incidence of respiratory problems, to which pet rats are, sadly, genetically prone.

        • beobrigitte says:

          Jariel, I sure did warm up to rats after having had Basil!!! My offspring pestered for pet rats again and again. They all were interesting animals, albeit NEVER matching Basil’s originality. (I could swear Basil had a sense of humour – and he knew he was irritating the cat by grabbing her tail…)
          I vividly do remember a really sad case: Drako. Drako was a “Dumbo-rat”. The breeders insist that the bigger ears makes these rats more appealing to people. Drako sure was really cute and of a very gentle nature. He did like to curl up with any of us, watching TV. Sadly, Drako only made it to 18 month of life. He had ear infections. Dumbo rats are prone to it – and mostly die from it at a young age. My vet told us that Drako was lucky to make it even this far!!!

          We NEVER bought a Dumbo rat again!

    • Frank Davis says:

      This is one of the reasons I’ve turned against the NHS. I’ve realised that, once they no longer have to keep their customers happy, they become little tyrants. In fact, that may well be exactly where the insanity starts, and why it’s not going to end any time soon.

      I’ve gone private from time to time in the past. It’s just that it’s more expensive. Although the NHS isn’t cheap either.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Exactly Frank VA was suppose to be free,but when free means appointments months and months apart to NO SERVICE its time to just take it up the wazoo as we said in the military and dig deep and pay for it yourself. Because government sector medical don’t give shit one way or the other if you like it or not. Oh they put out crap performance sheets on the walls and the help us help you better suggestion boxes around the VA hospitals I just write ” fuck you” on them and leave. It just aint worth it ever and it really got bad back in 1998 when they went to block scheduling bringing in up to 200 people for a block frame from 8 am to 12pm……………Then One doc oversaw 10-18 foreign interns and we became their guinea pigs………..don’t forget your translator! lol

  4. cherie79 says:

    Should have read ‘insanity passes’

  5. Joe L. says:

    I believe dental health is almost entirely attributable to genetics, along with health in general.

    I was fortunate to have received good dental genes. I’m in my mid-30’s, and have never had any dental work done beyond a handful of cleanings and X-rays. I rarely eat sweets or drink soda and I brush my teeth twice a day, however, I have smoked regularly for 20 years and I drink beer daily. The last time I went in for a cleaning was about 6 years ago, which was my first dentist visit since high school. I went to some brand new dental office that was offering deals in order to bring in new customers (the cheap price was the only reason I went). In the middle of my cleaning, I mentioned to the hygienist that I hadn’t had a cleaning in about 15 years and she seemed very surprised. Later, I wound up mentioning I was a smoker, and she was shocked. She told me she would have never guessed I smoked nor that I had waited so long between cleanings because my teeth were in such good condition.

    On the other hand, an old friend of mine, a never-smoker who is only a couple years older than me has already had two root canals performed. If a study was performed on a sample set consisting of only the two of us, the researchers would have to conclude that smoking is actually beneficial to one’s dental health.

    Side note: in my aforementioned visit, the dentist, after taking X-rays, went on to tell me that I had 4 cavities (never had one before) and that I also “needed” to have all four of my wisdom teeth pulled (at nearly 30 years of age). When I told him they had never once given me issues, he countered with a lame, “sure, but they’re bound to be a problem later on, because you can’t reach them properly when you brush them.” I left the office with a quote for about $1400 worth of dental work which I hung on my fridge to laugh at for months. Six years on, I still have all of my wisdom teeth and I never had my “cavities” filled. I have had no issues to speak of whatsoever on either front. It’s all bullshit. Dentistry, like the rest of modern “healthcare,” is simply a racket, and smoking, in its current demonized and denormalized state is a perfect tool for these modern-day snake oil salesmen.

  6. Rose says:

    Margo

    You might like to read something that has presumably been previously read by your NHS dentist.

    SmokeFree and Smiling
    Helping dental patients to quit tobacco

    Second edition [the first being 2007]
    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/288835/SmokeFree__Smiling_110314_FINALjw.pdf

    It’s all there.

    Apparently NHS stop smoking services started in 1999 ,the same year that the WHO Partnership Project with three drugs companies started.

    Who Launches Partnership With The Pharmaceutical Industry To Help Smokers Quit
    http: //web.archive.org/web/20130530064615/http://www.who.int/inf-pr-1999/en/pr99-04.html
    – for those haven’t already read it.

    Persuading dentists to join in.

    Smoking cessation as a dental intervention – views of the profession.
    2006

    “Abstract
    OBJECTIVE:
    “To undertake a questionnaire-based survey to determine the attitudes and activities of dental professionals in primary care in the Northern Deanery of the UK in relation to providing smoking cessation advice.”

    METHODS:
    “Questionnaires for dentists, hygienists and dental nurses were sent to hygienists to distribute to other members of the team. The information collected included: smoking status of the professionals and the practice; roles of the dental team in giving smoking cessation advice; levels of training received; and potential barriers to giving this brief intervention.”

    RESULTS:
    “Potential barriers to delivering smoking cessation advice were identified: lack of remuneration; lack of time; and lack of training.”

    CONCLUSION:
    Dental teams in primary care are aware of the importance of offering smoking cessation advice and, with further training and appropriate remuneration, could guide many of their patients who smoke to successful quit attempts.”
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16841084

    How much they get for taking time out of treatment to take on this extra task is what I was looking for but can’t find.

    2011 Local Stop Smoking Services
    “It is not recommended that service providers are remunerated for referrals as this
    activity is often remunerated through Commissioning for Quality and Innovation
    (CQUIN) and Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) payment schemes (see
    pages 17–18)”

    The only payments for pharmacists and smoking cessation advisers I’ve found are now woefully out of date and you’d expect a dentist to get paid even more for irritating their patients.

    NHS suspects fraud in £61m stop smoking programme
    2006

    “The Guardian has learned of inquiries in five primary care trusts in London into allegations that chemists have fraudulently claimed thousands of pounds, claiming cash rewards of up to £85 for each patient they help to stop smoking for at least four weeks.”

    Pharmacists receive cash bonuses of between £50 and £85 for every person who has continued to abstain from smoking four weeks after starting the programme, as proved by two consecutive low carbon monoxide readings.A pharmacist who treats 600 patients in a year stands to make up to £85,000 gross profit.”
    http: //www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/dec/28/smoking.health

    Government targets fostered £90,000 NHS fraud
    2008

    “A man defrauded nearly £90,000 from the NHS by working as a stop smoking adviser and signing up non-smoking strangers to exaggerate his success rates.”

    “Harry Singer, 54, took advantage of the Government’s smoking cessation programme which pays doctors, pharmacists and community groups £45 for every patient they convince to give up for four weeks.”
    http: //www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2592187/Government-targets-fostered-90000-NHS-fraud.html

    And it’s something it wouldn’t be prudent to ask of a dentist with a drill in their hand.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Sorta like being a drug dealer only the NRT sales didn’t back up the claims made………..

      Maybe they shoulda just made the cash bribe in sales of nrt products versus claiming you helped coach/scare people into quitting.

    • margo says:

      Yes, I think you’ve found the ‘Dentists Bible’, Rose. They get these journals, I gather, from their Dentist Association. When I got home, I did feel like doing what Frank has suggested, complaining to someone in some kind of dental authority, but when I went online I realised I’d get no sympathy there – as a smoker I’d be in the wrong and the dentist would be right to have lectured me.

  7. jltrader says:

    Dentists are actually required to give smoking cessation advice so complaining to the NHS, GDC or MPs brainwashed enough to vote for display bans and plain packaging won’t get you anywhere.

    • Frank Davis says:

      In my entire life, I’ve never had one single dentist give me a smoking lecture. The hygienist that tried to give me a lecture wasn’t a dentist.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Pretty much the same here Frank

      • margo says:

        I suspect this is a relatively new thing, Frank, that the Dental Association (if that’s what it’s called) has jumped aboard maybe over the last ten years or so, because it never used to happen to me either.

  8. jaxthefirst says:

    Like a lot of people (although not you ballsy lot on here, who are much braver!), I take the line of least resistance when dealing with medicos of all kinds, including dentists. When I recently had to change my dentist and was asked to fill in the usual first-visit “questionnaire,” I simply put a line through the “are you a smoker?” box, giving the impression that, no, I wasn’t. I did this on the basis that if smoking really does have all the dire dental effects that have been quoted on here, then any good dentist would instantly be able to tell that I smoked, regardless of what I put on the damned questionnaire. On the other hand, if all the hype is just that – hype – then it wouldn’t make an ounce of difference whether I’d put yes or no on it. Turns out the latter seems to be true. My new dentist (who is, incidentally, excellent) has never said a thing about smoking one way or the other, and indeed has commented on my “gums of steel” each time I go for a checkup and he does that little proddy-thing they do to test gum firmness. Morally, I thought of it as a little “test” for my new chap! After all, I’m the customer here (I’ve gone private), and I was the one who would potentially be forking out my hard-earned cash for him to “do his stuff,” so it seemed only fair for me to try a little preliminary experiment to test his mettle!

    I’ve long believed that anti-smokerism detracts medical professionals from doing their jobs properly, because – as several examples on here have amply illustrated – it serves as a constant background distraction and makes them “take their eye off the ball” and miss things (like a dropped brick, as per Margo’s comment on the last post!) that should otherwise be medically obvious to them. In fact, if I came across a dentist who was an anti-smoker, for this very reason I’d change them, because I’d be concerned about the standard of care which anyone with such a one-eyed obsession could possibly offer. It would be a bit like going to see a counsellor who was also a rabid Christian – they’d never be able to give you truly impartial support and help, because they’d relate every problem in your life to a lack of faith in Jesus or something!

    I’d advise anyone in the UK to go private if at all possible. I was NHS with my last dentist (who was also very good, incidentally), but I still got charged for virtually everything he ever did, and pretty much at the same level as my new private one (around £40 for a filling, I think on the last occasion). As far as I can tell, the main difference between NHS dental treatment and private is that there are some procedures which dentists simply aren’t permitted to do under the NHS, and they are limited in those which they are allowed to offer (I was, for example, told when I needed a crown that the NHS could only offer a gold one, whereas if I “went private” for that job, I could get a white one – the difference in cost was only about £100 which, bearing in mind that either way it was going to cost around £250 anyway, wasn’t that much greater a hardship to get a better-looking tooth). So that, essentially, for people in the UK, for some treatments there’s actually only the choice of getting certain work done privately (I suspect that implants fall into this category), or not getting it done at all. The choice between having those works done expensively and privately, or cheaply under the NHS just doesn’t exist!

    And certainly, for me, there’s a mild feeling of empowerment about being a paying customer, whereby you have the choice to take your custom elsewhere, whereas as an NHS patient one always has the feeling that in some way the dentist (or, indeed, doctor) has the inner feeling that in some way they are doing you a bit of a favour and thus have the right to treat you how they please, including, if they wish, lecturing you at every opportunity about their own particular health hobby-horse.

    Give your NHS dentist the bum’s rush, Margo, and find yourself a nice private one instead!

    • margo says:

      Very good points, jaxthefirst. I’ve been thinking about simply saying, “I gave up yesterday”. I know tons of people who lie to their docs and dentists, but I’ve up to now taken a sort of moral stance on that and told the truth – partly because I think they should know how little their anti-smoking campaign is actually working, and if smokers say they don’t smoke it’ll seem as if it is. But I get so much distress and anger from this policy I’m now thinking of lying like all the other smokers, and perhaps they’ll leave me alone about it and get on with the job they’re paid to do.
      As for changing dentists, I may well do this after this bout of treatment and look for a private one who won’t lecture me. It seems clear from what everyone here is saying that if you go private you get treated better. It will be more expensive as I’m not only a NHS patient, I’m a low-income one who gets a bit of a discount for only getting a tiny pension.
      It’s also clear that my teeth are not in such bad shape at all (yet!) I’ve got to a fair way over 70 and only lost two – that doesn’t seem bad. Okay, now some of them are getting a bit wobbly, but still – not bad going. (I put it down to meticulous cleaning for the last fifteen years, after I lost the first one and learnt the error of my ways – pity I didn’t start earlier, but there we are). I should be congratulated by the dentist, not bullied!

      • beobrigitte says:

        I think they should know how little their anti-smoking campaign is actually working, and if smokers say they don’t smoke it’ll seem as if it is.

        For as long as they can screw enough cash out of gullible politicians they will ignore the facts. Turn the money tap off for them and life will change for the better for us.

  9. prog says:

    I and all my family are registered with an NHS dentist. Been going there for (gulp) best part of 60 years. Had my ups and downs – yes. some painful and scary (gas!gas!gas!) experiences and I recall old Mr P with his knee on my chest trying to get leverage over a stubborn wisdom tooth. And the occasional and predictable lecture from the hygienists, but otherwise the epitome of a good, traditional, practice. Sadly. his son, the senior dentist and very pro NHS, is retiring soon and the future is uncertain. He was one year below me at school btw…

    Anyway, still got most teeth – bar the molars at the back, dentist says they are not essential for chewing, which I can completely agree with.

    • prog says:

      Oh yeah, and they hate the elf ‘n safety prodnose jobsworths who seem to think they can’t be trusted to practice without regular inspections and directives etc

  10. harleyrider1978 says:

    Heres a died in the wool Prohibiitonist Nazi

    ANDRÉ PICARD

    Let’s take bolder steps to stamp out smoking

    For years, we have been gradually tightening the noose on smokers with public-health measures, such as restricting smoking in the workplace, hiking tobacco taxes, introducing graphic warnings on cigarette packages, ending tobacco-company sponsorship of sporting and artistic events, outlawing advertising, eliminating flavoured products that target children, banishing tobacco products from pharmacies and hiding them out of sight in corner stores, and banning smoking in bars, restaurants, patios, parks, beaches and so on.

    These measures have been relatively effective. Since 1980, Canada has cut the percentage of women and men who smoke by half. But progress has been slow and gradual.

    There are still about 4.7 million regular smokers, or 16 per cent of adults in Canada. More than 40,000 Canadians die annually of tobacco-related illnesses, principally cancer, cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

    Tobacco remains a legal product, one that is widely used and quite profitable, despite the fact that it is lethal.

    Are we going to content ourselves with quietly encouraging smokers to quit and passively hoping young people will not begin smoking and expecting that the problem will resolve itself somehow, some day in the distant future?

    Or are we going to set hard targets for the elimination of tobacco?

    After decades of short-term, largely local measures, it’s time to embrace some bold national initiatives.

    The endgame needs to be clear: To eradicate the use of tobacco products and the diseases they cause in the near future. That means there needs to be a hard deadline, say, 2025 for Canada, and 2040 for the rest of the world. (Most countries define being “tobacco-free” as having fewer than 5 per cent of adults who smoke.)

    So how do you get there? There are a number of possible strategies.

    Prohibition: Tobacco is a toxic addictive substance with little or no redeeming value that creates a great health and economic burden. Banning it outright would be justifiable but probably ineffective. We have to bear in mind, too, that governments have both tolerated and profited from tobacco for a long time, and punishing nicotine addicts would be cruel.

    Tobacco-free generation: There is a proposal in Singapore for a line-in-the-sand approach – to bar anyone born after 2000 from buying or consuming tobacco products, with the aim of gradually phasing out its sale and use. A novel idea, but probably difficult to enforce in most countries.

    Shrinking supply: You take a base year of tobacco sales, and then reduce supply by 10 per cent a year and, in a decade, there is no more tobacco sold. New Zealand is taking this tack, but it can only work in a country that is relatively isolated and can strictly control imports.

    A regulated market: Make the government solely responsible for the marketing and distribution of tobacco (similar to the LCBO monopoly over alcohol in Ontario) then gradually choke off supply. A number of countries have state-run tobacco production and sales – notably China, home to one-third of the world’s smokers – but they have little incentive to reduce sales sharply.

    Prescription-only tobacco: Make tobacco a controlled substance and limit access to those with an addiction. With this approach, you limit access to new smokers, but don’t punish long-time smokers. However, there likely would be a vigorous black market, as there is for other prescription drugs.

    Nicotine-reduction legislation: Strictly regulate the amount of nicotine in cigarettes, and force manufacturers to reduce it over time, so that smokers are tapered off their addiction, and tobacco becomes less addictive. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is considering this approach.

    Ultimately, the solution likely will be a combination of some of these measures as well as the more traditional public-health and harm-reduction approaches.

    There also needs to be much more serious effort invested in smoking cessation, in helping people who want to quit (which is most) actually quit.

    And, of course, there will be new challenges that crop up along the way, like e-cigarettes. They create a conundrum because they have the potential to eliminate the most damaging aspect of smoking (the smoke and other byproducts of combustion are what cause disease and death, not nicotine), but can also undermine anti-smoking efforts by normalizing the act of smoking (or vaping) anew.

    With 1.2 billion smokers worldwide, and more than five million smoking-related deaths a year, we cannot underestimate the challenge.

    Traditional, cautious tobacco-control measures will take forever to have a lasting impact, and deaths will pile up by the millions.

    The carnage inflicted by smoking has gone on far too long. Surely, the time for half measures has passed. Some urgency is in order in the quest for a tobacco-free world.

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/lets-take-bolder-steps-to-stamp-out-smoking/article24459857/

    • Barry Homan says:

      Take a good look at the guy. A self-loathing little SOB if i ever spotted one, it’s himself whom he hates, he tries to bounce this hate onto smokers. Probably been a long time since he had any.

      It’s getting so you can spot an anti at 50 yards.

      • I actually featured Picard in “Brains” in the section “Communicating with Antismokers.” He’d written some near-libelous content about a wonderful fighter on our side named Martha Perske. Martha wrote him and his editor seeking some sort of retraction and got absolutely no satisfaction in return. He then went on, several years later, to take a quote from the satirical character “Jamie Disgrace” in my satire at http://bit.ly/OutdoorSmokeStudy ) and attribute it to me as a serious statement. I *also* wrote to him and his editor and was ignored.

        – MJM

  11. harleyrider1978 says:

    ISIS thugs viciously beat their cowering fellow terrorists – because they were SMOKING

    ISIS terrorists have been recorded savagely beating a group of their cowering fellow jihadis.

    Their crime? Enjoying a sneaky cigarette.

    The shocking footage shows a masked militant walking up and down the men, who are lined up sitting against a wall.

    He stomps on the men, who vainly try to defend themselves from the blows raining down.

    The thug also jabs the men with the barrel of his assault rifle, and at one point bashes the head of one of his victim’s with the wooden butt of the weapon.

    He is then shoved aside by a colleague, who frantically whips the men with what appears to be a belt.

    ISIS enforce strict rules against smoking – considering the habit a “slow suicide” and, therefore, un-Islamic.

    Anyone found smoking on land owned by the caliphate could be publicly whipped, massively fined or even executed.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/isis-thugs-viciously-beat-cowering-5722162

    • Thank you for the link to that story Harley. The main action in TobakkoNacht was set in the US in the 2020s and 2030s. Looks like my predictions of 20 years ago (my early drafts of the main action were written 1995-1997) are coming true ahead of schedule and in a different setting. I wonder how long it’ll be until we hit “The Spark,” “The Flame,” and “TobakkoNacht” itself….

      :/
      MJM

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Yep 1983 all over again. The world including the EU zone has become a hotbed of literally everything from racism,culture clashes,indebtedness and forced regulatory rules via the new Hitlers at Brussels. Just read Vince showing the Greeks are going ahead and taking all the money in bank accounts from the greeks the same as was done in Cyprus.

        The Mideast is just one rift in a worldwide disorder created from the UN and its so called manifest destiny mission to control the world………

        Smoking even Hitler couldn’t stop it and these idiots think they can………….

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Tobacco Taxation and Unintended Consequences: U.S. Senate Hearing on Tobacco Taxes Owed, Avoided, and Evaded

          Drenkard Statement to U.S. Senate Finance Committee July 2014 .

          The high tax burden on tobacco results in de facto prohibition of the products, bringing all the undesirable outcomes associated with alcohol prohibition in the 1920s. In our research we have found evidence of substantial tobacco smuggling from low to high tax jurisdictions, violent crime, theft of tobacco and tobacco tax stamps, corruption of law-enforcement officers, and even funding of terrorist organizations through crime rings.

          http://taxfoundation.org/article/tobacco-taxation-and-unintended-consequences-us-senate-hearing-tobacco-taxes-owed-avoided-and-evaded

          WIKI

          The Bureau of Prohibition’s main function was to mostly stop the selling and consumption of alcohol. Agents would be tasked with taking down illegal bootlegging rings and became notorious in cities like New York City and Chicago for raiding many popular nightclubs. Agents were often paid low wages and the Bureau was notorious for allowing many uncertified people to become agents. However, doing so strengthened the bureau, as they were able to hire agents in greater numbers. In 1929, the Jones Law was passed. The Jones Law increased violations previously set in the Volstead Act. First time offenders were now expected to serve a maximum of five years and a $10,000 fine as opposed to the previous 6 months and $1,000 fine in the Volstead Act. In the public opinion, this strengthened animosity towards prohibition agents as many of them, such as Major Maurice Campbell, Prohibition administrator of New York City, were already hated for their unfair raiding of popular clubs usually inhabited by New York City’s elite.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureau_of_Prohibition

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Mike truly how much longer can it last…………

          Bootleg cigarettes, Prohibition and the death of Eric Garner

          by Walter Olson on December 6, 2014

          Eric Garner, asphyxiated during his arrest on Staten Island, had been repeatedly picked up by the NYPD for the crime of selling loose cigarettes. Washington Examiner:

          http://overlawyered.com/2014/12/eric-garner-criminalization-everyday-life/

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        We have enuf facts to make the government pay every smoker in the country trillions in damages against our rights and liberties being taken away.

  12. margo says:

    Dear Frank and all – I’ve just read through everything here but have to go out. I’m coming back later to respond properly. Feeling very flattered and pleased that you’ve taken this up (and quoted my stuff from yesterday, Frank). Talk to you all later!

  13. Margo, bring your dentist a printout of one of the referenced popular scare articles (either 1 or 3) and ask if this was what he was talking about.

    Then share this from pages 235 & 236 of TobakkoNacht…

    ==

    Of Mice And Men

    In 2007, a study was published in the Journal of Periodontology showing that subjects with periodontitis (a potentially serious gum disease) who were exposed to secondhand smoke were supposedly more likely to develop bone damage, the number one cause of tooth loss. According to the president of the American Academy of Periodontology, “This study really drives home the fact that even if you don’t smoke the effects of secondhand smoke can be devastating.” (1) That statement was followed up by a caution from DMD Dr. Kenneth Mogell, “… secondhand smoke has effects well beyond what we might have thought!” (2) And finally, as usual, a web page titled, “Secondhand Smoke Harms Children’s Health,” dragged the children in with a warning that “Periodontal disease [is] a leading cause of tooth loss…. No amount of secondhand smoke is safe for children. If you smoke, … quit. It’s important for your health and the health of your children.” (3,4)

    Sounds pretty serious, right? Kind of makes you think that parents who smoke will end up raising herds of toothless young geezers who’ll be laughed at in school. And that’s exactly the image that was meant to be conveyed. But what the headlines and quotes artfully hide is that the study was done using highly concentrated clouds of smoke and that the “subjects” studied were actually thirty-six specially bred Wistar rats! Dr. Nogueira-Filo et al. published their research with the intimidating title of “Low- and High-Yield Cigarette Smoke Potentiates Bone Loss During Ligature Induced Periodontitis” (5) Most newspaper readers and TV news viewers would never know the crucial facts: not only did the researchers study rats’ teeth instead of children’s teeth, but the rats were exposed to levels of smoke far beyond anything ever experienced by any child on the face of the earth.

    Basically, the rats were locked in a chamber measuring eight-tenths of a single cubic foot while the smoke from ten cigarettes was pumped through it. Eight minutes later, the half-suffocated animals would be dragged out, revived if necessary, and set aside to wait until their next visit to smoking hell. They got these treatments three times a day for a month and were then mercifully put out of their misery and dissected to determine whether any symptoms of damage to their gums could be detected. Oh, and to load the dice even more, the rats were initially given ligatures (wounds) around which the gums were valiantly trying to heal despite the repeated tortures of the antismoking scientists.

    How much smoke were they exposed to? Was it anything like what little Johnny and Janie might suffer while living with a smoking parent? Well, ten cigarettes in an eight-tenths cubic foot chamber would create the same concentration as a thousand cigarettes burned in a standard phone booth of about eighty cubic feet.* The experiment basically modeled a situation in which you would take your child to a dentist for a particularly nasty dental procedure, one that required deep stitches in his or her gums, and then brought that child home to be locked in a phone booth three times a day while you blew the smoke from 1,000 cigarettes at a time through that booth. The study showed that if you did that for a whole month, their gums might not have healed quite as well as if you hadn’t done that – although that’s only necessarily true if your child is a specially bred Wistar rat.

    To bring it closer to the real world, say you lived in a two story home offering 1,000 square feet per floor and ten-foot-high ceilings. That home would have roughly 20,000 cubic feet of air space; the equivalent of 250 phone booths. So, to duplicate the conditions of the experiment, you’d need to sit down and smoke roughly three quarters of a million cigarettes a day while your little ones tried to watch the Teletubbies through the haze. And then, when you brought your sweet and somewhat desiccated little loves back to the dentist a month later, you’d find that maybe they weren’t doing quite as well as you’d expected.**

    FOOTNOTES:
    * Phone booths are usually only around 70 cubic feet in volume, but for mathematical simplicity we’ll assume we had some help from Dr. Who in building this one.
    ** That’s assuming that anyone in your home or the surrounding neighborhood actually survived the 750,000 cigarettes per day regimen in the first place.

    REFERENCES:
    (1) Science Daily. “Secondhand Smoke Linked To Risk Of Tooth Loss,” ScienceDaily.com, April 4, 2007. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070403153859.htm.
    (2) Mogell KA. “Periodontal Disease and secondhand smoke,” DrMogell.com, June 5, 2007. http://www.drmogell.com/blog.htm.
    (3) Sims, J. “Secondhand Smoke Harms Children’s Health,” DeltaDental.com, December 13, 2010. http://oralhealth.deltadental.com/Search/22,21375.
    (4) MedlinePlus. “Secondhand Smoke,” National Institutes of Health, http://www.nlm.nih.gov/
    medlineplus/secondhandsmoke.html.
    (5) Nogueira-Filho G, Rosa BT, César-Neto JB, et al. “Low- and High-Yield Cigarette Smoke Inhalation Potentiates Bone Loss During Ligature-Induced Periodontitis,” Journal of Periodontology, April 2007, Volume 78, Number 4, pp. 730-735. dx.doi.org/10.1902/jop.2007.060323.

  14. harleyrider1978 says:

    CDC exposed as for-profit corporation colluding with Big Pharma to corrupt government

    Monday, May 18, 2015 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer
    Tags: CDC, United States corporation, Big Pharma

    http://www.naturalnews.com/049749_CDC_United_States_corporation_Big_Pharma.html

  15. Margo, my reply is in “moderation” because of the hotlinks in the references, so I’ll repeat it here with the hotlinks removed:

    Margo, bring your dentist a printout of one of the referenced popular scare articles (either 1 or 3) and ask if this was what he was talking about.

    Then share this from pages 235 & 236 of TobakkoNacht…

    ==

    Of Mice And Men

    In 2007, a study was published in the Journal of Periodontology showing that subjects with periodontitis (a potentially serious gum disease) who were exposed to secondhand smoke were supposedly more likely to develop bone damage, the number one cause of tooth loss. According to the president of the American Academy of Periodontology, “This study really drives home the fact that even if you don’t smoke the effects of secondhand smoke can be devastating.” (1) That statement was followed up by a caution from DMD Dr. Kenneth Mogell, “… secondhand smoke has effects well beyond what we might have thought!” (2) And finally, as usual, a web page titled, “Secondhand Smoke Harms Children’s Health,” dragged the children in with a warning that “Periodontal disease [is] a leading cause of tooth loss…. No amount of secondhand smoke is safe for children. If you smoke, … quit. It’s important for your health and the health of your children.” (3,4)

    Sounds pretty serious, right? Kind of makes you think that parents who smoke will end up raising herds of toothless young geezers who’ll be laughed at in school. And that’s exactly the image that was meant to be conveyed. But what the headlines and quotes artfully hide is that the study was done using highly concentrated clouds of smoke and that the “subjects” studied were actually thirty-six specially bred Wistar rats! Dr. Nogueira-Filo et al. published their research with the intimidating title of “Low- and High-Yield Cigarette Smoke Potentiates Bone Loss During Ligature Induced Periodontitis” (5) Most newspaper readers and TV news viewers would never know the crucial facts: not only did the researchers study rats’ teeth instead of children’s teeth, but the rats were exposed to levels of smoke far beyond anything ever experienced by any child on the face of the earth.

    Basically, the rats were locked in a chamber measuring eight-tenths of a single cubic foot while the smoke from ten cigarettes was pumped through it. Eight minutes later, the half-suffocated animals would be dragged out, revived if necessary, and set aside to wait until their next visit to smoking hell. They got these treatments three times a day for a month and were then mercifully put out of their misery and dissected to determine whether any symptoms of damage to their gums could be detected. Oh, and to load the dice even more, the rats were initially given ligatures (wounds) around which the gums were valiantly trying to heal despite the repeated tortures of the antismoking scientists.

    How much smoke were they exposed to? Was it anything like what little Johnny and Janie might suffer while living with a smoking parent? Well, ten cigarettes in an eight-tenths cubic foot chamber would create the same concentration as a thousand cigarettes burned in a standard phone booth of about eighty cubic feet.* The experiment basically modeled a situation in which you would take your child to a dentist for a particularly nasty dental procedure, one that required deep stitches in his or her gums, and then brought that child home to be locked in a phone booth three times a day while you blew the smoke from 1,000 cigarettes at a time through that booth. The study showed that if you did that for a whole month, their gums might not have healed quite as well as if you hadn’t done that – although that’s only necessarily true if your child is a specially bred Wistar rat.

    To bring it closer to the real world, say you lived in a two story home offering 1,000 square feet per floor and ten-foot-high ceilings. That home would have roughly 20,000 cubic feet of air space; the equivalent of 250 phone booths. So, to duplicate the conditions of the experiment, you’d need to sit down and smoke roughly three quarters of a million cigarettes a day while your little ones tried to watch the Teletubbies through the haze. And then, when you brought your sweet and somewhat desiccated little loves back to the dentist a month later, you’d find that maybe they weren’t doing quite as well as you’d expected.**

    FOOTNOTES:
    * Phone booths are usually only around 70 cubic feet in volume, but for mathematical simplicity we’ll assume we had some help from Dr. Who in building this one.
    ** That’s assuming that anyone in your home or the surrounding neighborhood actually survived the 750,000 cigarettes per day regimen in the first place.

    REFERENCES:
    (1) Science Daily. “Secondhand Smoke Linked To Risk Of Tooth Loss,” ScienceDaily.com, April 4, 2007.
    (2) Mogell KA. “Periodontal Disease and secondhand smoke,” DrMogell.com, June 5, 2007.
    (3) Sims, J. “Secondhand Smoke Harms Children’s Health,” DeltaDental.com, December 13, 2010.
    (4) MedlinePlus. “Secondhand Smoke,” National Institutes of Health,
    (5) Nogueira-Filho G, Rosa BT, César-Neto JB, et al. “Low- and High-Yield Cigarette Smoke Inhalation Potentiates Bone Loss During Ligature-Induced Periodontitis,” Journal of Periodontology, April 2007, Volume 78, Number 4, pp. 730-735.

    • margo says:

      Thanks, MJM, that’ll do fine. I’ll take the book along with me next time. Jaxthe first pointed out (above) the similarity between dentists who focus on smoking and Christian counsellors counselling non-Christians. It’s a good analogy, that. I expect the dentist will have one of his Journals to show me, so we’ll be in a “I’ll read your book if you read mine” situation. I used to know someone who kept a Koran by the front door and said this to Jehovah’s Witnesses who wanted him to read their Watchtower paper. They never wanted to read it.

      • LOL! Yeah, I like to joke that if we could make Antismokers actually read my books their heads would explode. :>

        I’m lucky: I’ve got a dentist who grew up in the hippie radical era and has retained his radical roots rather than just melting into American Liberalism. I’ve been going to this guy for close to forty years! And he LOVES both Brains ‘n TNacht! :> He’s mad as hell about what the same sort of folks have done to his work. Evidently he’s no longer allowed to use certain formulations in fixing teeth (fillings? reconstructions?) because of some sub-microscopic risk they supposedly present. Unfortunately, if he’s correct in what he says, the NEW formulations he’s now required to use fall apart in five or ten years and the patients will have to come back and have them done all over again! He’s always admiring the cap that was put on one of my two upper front (buck) teeth about fifty years ago and which is still as good as new!

        :)
        MJM

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Mike funny thing,they told me after the last tooth is removed call and they would set up a 90 day later appointment for my plate fitting as it takes that long for all the healing and gum inflammation to disappear………so 30 days wouldn’t have fixed the gum line incisions anyway.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Save I had a dry socket once and it took nearly 2 months for the gum line to grow over the sore. It didn’t matter if you smoked or not its just a slower growth on gumlines period.

      • Everyone heals differently. Age, nutrition, smoking, drinking, amount of sleep and stress ALL play a role — and that’s why it’s so wrong when a doc or dentist just focuses on one factor as a make-it-or-break-it sort of thing.

        There probably are a FEW conditions where smoking has a truly major impact (e.g. COPD in people with Alpha-Antitrypsin Deficiency, or Buerger’s Disease) on the prognosis, but when the docs lie and exaggerate all along to scare patients into living the “perfect” life … they then lay the groundwork that results in patients never really believing ANYthing they’re told. And THAT can have really bad consequences sometimes for all different sorts of patients in different situations engaging in different behaviors. The TRUST in our doctors is a very important part of medicine: and the Antismokers have helped enormously to destroy that trust.

        :/
        MJM

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          They destroyed trust in everything………….science,goverment,mediciene, even black magic took a hit…………lol

  16. harleyrider1978 says:

    Anti-smoking commercials burn out over time

    The massive, federally funded anti-smoking campaign ‘Tips From Former Smokers’—’Tips’ for short—fizzled more than it popped. That’s the conclusion behind research published this week in the American Journal of Preventive…

    http://medicalxpress.com/news/2015-05-anti-smoking-commercials.html

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Funny I haven’t see any decline in smoking on tv has anyone else……….

      • LOL! Harley, aside from a VERY few exceptions (e.g. Breaking Bad) smoking is almost nonexistent on TV compared to the real world (except in antismoking commercials perhaps…) :>

        E.G. first 200 episodes of “Bones” : well over 1,000 images of people drinking alcohol. Less than five images of people smoking (all negative btw…). “Hannibal” : ton’s of delicious eating of dismembered corpses, but not a smoke in sight… so it’s safe for the kids to watch. “Blue Bloods” : Tom Selleck smoked three cigars in the first season… but no one else in NY City smokes, and Selleck got yelled at once or twice during those three. I could go on….

        • And don’t forget Lie #2 at TheTruthIsALie.com !

        • beobrigitte says:

          I did watch an amrican film (made in 2013) in which a Chef takes on a food critic and sets of on a road trip with his young son. Plenty of smoking, better even, bars WITH ASHTRAYS on the tables!!!!
          The film was a “Sunday afternoon” film – but I did like the smoking being NORMAL!

          I did like Sigourney Weaver filling ashtray after ashtray in “Avatar”. Unfortunately, the scenes with her sat smoking and the overfilled ashtrays, mulling over the problem, have been removed. I did buy the blue ray version in the hope these scenes were still there. No such luck.

          I rarely watch TV these days. Too boring and non-sensical. And, if Russel Brand is declared as being funny, I do really good, missing this idiot amongst the other rubbish being fed to the public.
          BTW, “Better call Saul” is currently available on Netflix, but I wait until it’s finished. I did session “Breaking bad” on my days off work. Door locked and phone off the hook.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Mike I don’t watch ABC CBS or NBC shows just the movie channels and westerns and occasionally madmen.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          My biggest problem Ive had this damned stomach bug goes away comes back goes away comes back then sinuses and or sore throat then aches……….been going on for months.

          Eat lite feel better eat heavy feels like a cement bag in your gut then chills and fever.

          everybodys had it around here its like the beast that never leaves.

  17. harleyrider1978 says:

    $200 Million Federal Anti-Smoking Campaign Flops

    Newsmax

    That’s the finding of a new analysis published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine by San Diego State University public health researcher

    http://www.newsmax.com/Health/Health-News/cdc-smoking-campaign-tip/2015/05/19/id/645473/

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Noting “Tips” was the nation’s “most costly tobacco control initiative,” Ayers added: “In 2013 ‘Tips’ stopped being effective, but we can improve the campaign to make it even more effective than when it began. Reflecting on the campaign as a whole, he added that visually shocking commercials tended to prompt more internet searches, but that shock becomes less effective over time. Our analysis shows we can’t keep hammering on the same subject.”

      • beobrigitte says:

        Our analysis shows we can’t keep hammering on the same subject.”
        LOOOOOOOL!!!!! Too late!!!! Can the anti-smokers do anything else?

        So far I read/hear the same old, lame, arguments over and over again – even in different languages!

        What a waste of public money and time!

        • beobrigitte says:

          “Content that motivated people’s interest during 2012 only seemed to motivate them about half as much when presented with the same content again in 2013,” Ayers said. “The timing of these advertisements did not correspond to any increase in smoking cessation related internet searches.”

          The truth is – people have had enough of the anti-smokers’ cause.
          The smokers are still here, alive and kicking. Visible proof.

  18. Pingback: The Path of Least Resistance | Frank Davis

  19. Pingback: Global Social Disintegration | Frank Davis

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s