Dental Material Woes
It’s been six months since my dental revision done in Mexico by Dr. Lagos. I am certainly glad to have three infected teeth gone. But my bite is still off. This is due to my body’s lack of structural alignment – my right and left muscles are out of balance. But other issues I have are dental-related: I have a two tooth-space on my lower left, which used to be covered by a partial but is now uncovered and free, thanks to #18’s root exposure, and I wear two partials on the top – one for the left side and one for the right. They substitute for the missing #3 and #14. Partials are not the funnest when you’re chewing. But implants do not appeal to me.
The reason for this post is a bit of frustration due to not being clear on what materials to use for a permanent crown over tooth #30. This is a tooth that Dr. Lagos covered with a temporary crown, that he said would need a permanent in six months. Just like clockwork, the temp fell out last week, and unfortunately, got swallowed. Oh well, these things happen.
Dr. Lagos said that he would use Diamondcrown for the permanent crown. My local, somewhat holistic dentist said that Diamondcrown is not durable and could crack or come off in a year. Maybe less if I don’t grind my teeth at night, which I don’t. Diamondcrown showed up as ‘Least Reactive’ on my BioComp testing (see below).
So I called Leo Cashman, tireless dental health crusader of DAMS – Dental Amalgam Mercury Solutions. Over the years Leo has been very generous with his time when I’ve called him. DAMS has a newsletter you can subscribe to for $25, highly recommended (email him at email@example.com). Leo agrees with Clifford Consulting and Research, who believe that alumina in dental materials is not reactive. From Clifford:
Dental products are not the only ones where we find the benign forms of aluminum. The glass jars which contain our foods and beverages on the grocer’s shelf are basically barium-boro-aluminosilicates. Sand on the seashore is a rich mix of aluminum oxide and various aluminosilicates. Glass utensils, dishes and vessels in the kitchen (ie., Pyrex, Kimax, Corningware, Stoneware, Anchor-Hocking) are similar aluminosilicates and aluminum oxides. In our bodies, by nature, the bones are comprised of 2.0% – 2.5% aluminosilicate, aluminum oxide or alumina. If the patient can safely have food or beverage stored in glass, or can safely eat food prepared in a Pyrex pan or bowl, or can safely walk on sand, then it becomes immediately obvious that these forms of aluminum are not a threat to good health. The aluminunosilicate / aluminum oxide content of the bones is supplied and replenished daily from the fruits, grains and vegetables of the diet. The aluminosilicate content of lettuces and other vegetables in a single fresh garden salad serving will easily exceed the total quantity of aluminum released in ionized form from a mouthful of porcelain or ceramic crowns over a period of years.
In 2008 I had the Clifford’s blood test done, and it listed the Aluminum Group as ‘Reactive.’
In 2012 I had the BioComp blood test done, and it too listed Aluminum as ‘Highly Reactive.’
So when I went to Dr. Lagos, removing porcelain crowns (porcelain contains aluminum) was part of the dental revision. Dr. Lagos, as well as Dr. Huggins both use BioComp for their biocompatibility testing for dental materials.
Recently I came across the work of Carol Vander Stoep. She is a dental hygenist with thirty years of experience and author of Mouth Matters. She was kind enough to answer my emails:
I am trying to find a good material to use for a crown. My BioComp report said no aluminum – that I tested as highly reactive to E-Max. Yet Leo Cashman from DAMS tells me on the phone that that’s the one that is working best for people in terms of reactivity, and that the biocompatibility test may not be all that we hope.
Do you know where I can go online to read about what material to ask my dentist to use?
That question is a biggie. This article should give you a starting point:
Mercola’s interview with me I felt was the starting point of opening a can of worms on materials used in dentistry. It is always a matter of choosing the least toxic for each person… hard to do! One of the reasons I want change in the ways we diagnose at an early age. More accurate, etc.
Carol Vander Stoep, RDH, BSDH, OMT
Yes it seems like a biggie. People disagree. Years ago I did a Clifford test. It showed the Aluminum Group as reactive, and Silicates Group as nonreactive. Last year I did the BioComp, which showed Aluminum as highly reactive, but made no mention of Silicates.
My doctor in Mexico, Dr. Lagos, says to use a Diamondcrown material for the crown I need.
My local, somewhat holistic dentist in Va. Beach says Diamondcrown is not durable.
Leo Cashman from DAMS says he wouldn’t use Diamondcrown either, because it’s not durable. He would use E-Max. E-Max showed up as highly reactive for me in the BioComp report.
Dr. Cook’s lab (dentistryhealth.com) said he wouldn’t use E-Max because they don’t test well energetically!
I guess my best bet is finding an EAV person who has the dental material software to test my energy with them?
What do you do in this situation?
And yes, I’d seen that article before, but it was good to read again! Who is right – Clifford (alumina is fine) or BioComp (most people react to alumina)?
And so here I remain – researching, talking, reading, about what to do next. If any of you have some experience to share on this matter, I would love to hear about it.
PS: Check back in a couple of months, when I do my expose on Oil Pulling for gum problems and oral (and possibly systemic) health!