E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSPeople who frequently receive routine dental x-rays are at an increased risk of developing the most commonly diagnosed brain tumor, according to a new report from the American Cancer Society. Dr. Nancy Snyderman, NBC's chief medical editor, reports.
By Robert Bazell
Chief Science and Medical Correspondent
NBC News
Dental X-rays could double the risk for the most common brain tumor, according to a study released Tuesday from scientists and doctors at Yale, Harvard and other prestigious institutions published in Cancer, a scientific journal of the American Cancer Society.
It sounds frightening -- and there is no question it invokes a serious warning -- but even those who carried out the research urge people not to overreact.
"Our take home message is don’t panic. Don’t stop going to the dentist," said the lead author of the study Dr. Elizabeth Claus, a neurological surgeon at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston and the Yale School of Public Health.
But people "should have a conversation with their dentist" about the need to use X-rays as little as possible to keep teeth healthy, Claus says. That’s a conclusion few would dispute, with or without the new study.
Getty Images
Ask your dentist to use X-rays as little as possible.
The tumor studied is meningioma, a type that is usually not malignant, meaning it can grow but not spread. To be sure, it can cause severe problems in some patients. But people with meningiomas often live long, healthy lives with no treatment, dying of some other cause. Doctors diagnose about 5,000 cases a year in the United States, about three times as often in women as in men.
Significantly, the study is the weakest type of epidemiology, a so-called “case control” study. The researchers interviewed 1,433 people diagnosed with meningioma and compared them with 1,350 people with no such diagnosis. The two groups were matched for age, gender, race, income and places of residence. In a tiny portion of the cases the researchers actually looked at dental records. But, most often, they asked the study subjects – whose average age was 57 -- to recall their history of dental X-rays going back to childhood.
The increased tumor risk increased in people who reported receiving bitewing exams, which use X-ray film held in place by a tab between the teeth, on a yearly or more frequent basis. There was also a greater risk from the panorex dental exam which uses an x-ray outside the mouth to get an image of all the teeth. Adults who had this type of dental X-ray when they were younger than 10 years had a five times greater risk of developing meningioma.
The well-known pitfall of case control studies is “recall bias.” People with a tumor or any other unwanted health outcome are far more likely to remember that they had X-rays, air pollution or pesticide exposure, cell phone use or anything else that might be suspected of causing the problem.
Dr. Otis W. Brawley, scientific director of the American Cancer Society, told me “the strongest thing you can say about this study is that there is a suggestion of a link between dental X-rays and meningioma.”
In guidelines published in 2006, the American Dental Association declared X-rays should not be used for "detecting disease before clinical examination." If the dentist thinks X-rays are warranted, they should be administrated with "the ALARA Principle (As Low as Reasonably Achievable) to minimize the patient’s exposure," the guidelines say.
It is also comforting that the dose for most dental X-rays has dropped hundred of times in recent decades.
"Our study," Claus told me, "refers to exposures in the past rather than exposures that people are receiving in this day and age."
Still, the ALARA principle is wise advice for all medical and dental procedures that submit a patient to radiation. This latest study is yet another reason why.
Robert Bazell is NBC's chief science and medical correspondent. Follow him on Facebook and on Twitter @RobertBazellNBC
More from Robert Bazell:
"False positive" mammogram can signal future cancer
Leave a Comment:
The link you provide to the study (doi.wiley.com/10.1002/cncr.26625) brings up a Page Not Found error. Can you provide a more helpful reference to the research?
AAARGGHHH!!! My daughter has to have a yearly panoramic xray and has since the age of 11 when she was diagnosed with an benign tumor in her jaw. We've done everything we can to reduce her radiation exposure including choosing to have her patted down an airports. Now this!!! Radiation damage is accumlative and it's even more harmful if started in childhood or teen years. Now, the very treatment that keeps my daughter safe from a reoccuring tumor that grows out of control can harm her. Please put better sourcing in your articles MSNBC. I would like to read the actual study so that I can discuss it with my daughter's doctor.
Your daughter will be exposed to more radiation by going outside than she will ever receive in a dental office. While your concerns are valid, there are likely very few options to monitor the tumor in your daughter's jaw. If you read some of the other posts, hopefully you'll understand that this isn't really a scientific study. This was merely a study that could potentially set up further scientific controlled studies. Unfortunately, the title of this article was terribly misleading. Best of luck to you and your daughter
Don't panic, Differnet. I read this article and it never should have been published. What a horrible gathering of disorganized misinformation to instill unnecessary panic in the public sector. If you have any concerns, don't ever hesitate to contact your daughter's doctor. I'm sure they will be able to put your mind at ease. Best of luck to you and your daughter. Dr G
BREAKING NEWS!!!!!
This just in! Being born guarantees you're going to die!!!
The way some people react to these stories, they might as well be wrapped up in bubble wrap and put in a crate so they don't have to live life.
The sort of "research" that this article is citing is called "observational epidemiology" and is generally considered by "real" scientists as junk science at best and idiotic at worst. Here is a link to an op-ed piece about why this is scientific trash that needs to be taken out:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2012/04/05/chocolate-red-meat-can-be-bad-for-your-science-why-many-nutrition-studies-are-all-wrong/
Essentially, you see tons of this stuff on MSNBC because physician-conducted research seems to be far more concerned with getting mentioned in the press than in conducting real useful science.
I should mention that it isn't just the radiation from the xray that concerns me. She's already had 2 bones scans and the evidence on the increase risk of cancer is confirmed. The earlier in life the bone scan the greater the risk. But we are just trying to keep things as low as possible.
I agree with Chris. More boogey man BS. People you are fine, don't buy into this crap (and yes I agree that you should always avoid unneeded radiation when you can but in this case I would wager your much better off health wise going to the dentist and taking care of your teeth than avoiding it for fear of these xrays). MSN shame on you for the misleading headline. There is no reason this should even be a news story until a real scientific study and research gets done. Clearly one of your authors (I use the term loosely) saw this or picked up on it somewhere and thought good way to drum up some traffic.
Remember always look for the sources and do some research before taking anything posted in ones of these articles to heart. Probably best to just avoid articles like this if at all possible when trying to do some meaningful research.
Now for the Suzanne Somers and Dr Oz lemmings to jump in and eat this article up hook line and stinker.
It is time
Take that Dr. Dave!! Our dentist always got pretty irate when I wouldn't let him take routine x-rays of my kids teeth every six months! My son, Peter, had had ALOT of head x-rays when he was 3 months old for a head injury he sustained when he wiggled off the washing machine in his little pumpkin seat and the technician couldn't get a clear view of the crack in Peter's scull because my son was screaming his head off and wiggling around! I had heard about the danger of the accumlative effect of x-rays (I believe it was on Phil Donahue Show) on kids.....naanaanaanaaana Dr. Dave! Both kids are grown, and healthy...and have great teeth ..even without routine x-ray exposure!
I think I'd be more worried about undetected cavities leading to a root canal from not having x-rays than the outside chance I'd get a brain tumor.
Such an alarmist article! BIG BOLD LETTERS..telling you that xrays increase your risk of cancer!! No kidding! They also help detect disease that would never be found, and as with anything, there is ALWAYS a risk! But we have to figure out the risk to benefit ratio before we determine that something really IS a risk versus what we GET from it! With todays digital xray techniques, dentists expose you to MUCH less radiation you receive than if you took a flight or even walked outside in the sunlight! In face, there is now NO MORE NEED to wear lead aprons because with todays modern xrays, the apron actually exposes the patient to more of the dangerous, slower type (gamma) radiation, than it would if the xrays were very fast, and passed thru the patient. SO, bottom line, if your dentist is up-to-date, and goes over the risk to benefit ratio of taking radiographs (xrays), then you'll be just fine!
www.vollersmiles.com
I was a participant in this study last year, after having a sizable( 9cm) meningioma removed in 08 from my frontal lobe.For this study I was asked to think about how many X-rays I'd had throughout my lifetime,and I recalled to the best of my ability how many X-rays I actually did have, and if you're an adult in your 60's, which I am, and had braces~2 sets of them from the ages of 8 to 14, it all adds up ! Dr.Claus is just giving info. for people to read about, but NOT take it to the extent of NEVER having X-rays again.As a meningioma survivor, we are all for the most part told NOT to have X-rays if it's not totally needed, and I can guarantee you that the majority of us won't unless it IS ABSOLUTLY necessary. It's something to think about though, just like the use of cell phones that are held directly on your head, or the use of a blue tooth, which is virtually the samething as holding a cell phone directly on your skull !We're told to use a wire when on the phone, or speaker phone. Brain surgery isn't a fun thing, and the outcome for many of us is not something that the vast majority of the poputaltion would want to deal with until the end of life ! These are all precautionary steps that won't hurt the public, just inform them, and they can then decide if they want X-rays, or find out from their dentist if they are really needed, if they choose not to have them.The level of X-ray is so much less than is was 50 years ago, but it's still just a question as to the safety of having them routinely, if not necessary.
Dear Pat, how old are you? kind of childish, this is a baloney study. Maybe you shouldn't let your kid fall of your washer and get head injuries so you don't need him to be xrayed???
From the article:
Yet you went ahead and gave it the headline "DENTAL X-RAYS CAN DOUBLE BRAIN TUMOR RISK, STUDY FINDS"
That is NOT responsible journalism... that is irresponsible alarmism. Given the problems with the study... recall bias, failure to thoroughly examine participant histories of x-rays, and ignoring the fact that x-ray dosages have dropped considerably-etc... the 'research' is highly questionable at best... and is NOT cause to give it such a misleading headline.
This is very disappointing, given that its written by "NBC's chief science and medical correspondent"...
totally agree with ARRELL...misleading info with a disasterous title
According to online sources, meningioma is not the most common brain tumor. The most common brain tumor is glioma. What is your source for this information?
glioma don't even begin from radiation, they start from tissue already present during delvelopment, therefore development of a glioma is really a allmost predetermined event independant of radiation exposure.
I am a female and a product of the fear-of-dentists era, born in late 1930s. Consequently, many dental visits and xrays as teeth went south. Now suffering from head aches, on-and-off blurred vision, neck and spine discomfort, and fnd myself searching for the correct word. Currently going to chiropractor for spine work and considering a neuro doctor. Suggestions and input welcome. blue-skynj@hotmail.com.
Well I had the same symptoms but it was because I was overweight and had high blood pressure.
I have lost 50 plus lbs and am on BP meds. I don't have the headaches and blurred vision anymore.
This study and its findings are so off base, the real problems people should be worried about at the dental office is the amalgam fillings ie: mercury fillings that they are still allowing to be put into peoples mouth. You will receive as much radiation with 1 dental x-ray as you would if you watch tv for 1 hour. Look into a tooth/organ chart.....be concerned about the root canals they do also. Read a book called root canal coverup.....lots of great information out there if you search for it. My concern is not a dental x-ray, and I have been in the dental field for 23 years.
More likely that what you are suffering through has to do more with the fact that you aren't 19 years old any more than from your experiences at a dentist. Staying active mentally and physically as well as paying attention to good sleep hygiene habits might go a long way toward alleviating some of the aches and pains you are suffering with.
Did the reporters who did this story even read the so called "research"? I think people should monitor their radiation, but this report is so off base and ludicrous to be non-believable. Just read the study and see what you think! Make up your own mind!
Kay, it sounds like you suffer from TMJ (tempomandibular joint dysfunction). The human jaw joint can become orthopaedically unstable from anything from growth, trauma, or poor dentistry. You don't need to have teeth to have this occur. I have been treating this for nearly 20 yrs. The only thing I can promise you is that there is control for this condition and that anybody who says they can cure you of this is a chiseler and liar.
At your age (close to 80) it is little wonder you do not feel like a teenager dear, just keep popping those pills your doctor perscribed and do not take it with booze, water is the word.
The article tells us nothing about what the risk is. If you're double a 10% risk, that's a lot but. But based on 5000 cases per year out of 300+M people, the risk is 0.00167% per year, or 1 chance in 60000. That probably about equal to the chance you'll be killed driving to your dental appointment!
This type of research is not aimed at determining absolute risk, but at comparative risk. There are simply too many uncontrolled variables to say much about anything very meaningful to the general public.
This sort of study was never intended to be anything more than a "fishing expedition." It was certainly not intended to be picked up and "interpreted" by the media. These types of studies are often done where there has not been much research in a particular area. In this case it is on the cusp of medical/dental issues, an area that falls largely through the cracks because dentistry is so poorly supported by any real science. (I am 68 and when I was a kid, the leading cause of tooth decay was toothpaste, not sweets. It's why you don't see the old brand names like Ipana and Gleem any more in this country. They worked by using abrasives which stripped away the enamel off your teeth.)
But what makes studies like this one valuable, while not gold standard science by any means, is that they provide "pilot" data that can then be used to design much more rigorous scientific studies in which the huge numbers of variables can be controlled.
Determining the relative risk/benefit of medical interventions (drugs, surgery, dentistry, etc) allows several things to happen that are very beneficial. Knowing the risks accurately allows a procedure, device or drug to be used more effectively. It also allows finite medical care dollars to be allocated where they will do the most good. And more understanding of the process and its risks and benefits can help with cancer research as well as with future objectives for further reducing the risk from x-rays. But at the same time, very little light is shed on the absolute risks involved.
Not to forget that bite wings are usually the only way to find small cavities between the molars and bicuspids that cannot be found by probing with an explorer until they are larger and result in a larger expensive filling and even possibly a root canal that could have been avoided. If you fore go these films for several years, in the long run, you could have emergent pain at 3 in the morning for something that could have been caught early and avoided.
Besides recall bias, there is another issue. That is that people who have the most dental x-rays, such as Kay from NJ, also have 'teeth that went south.' Could it be that the relatively benign type of cancer, meningioma, is associated with bad teeth rather than x-rays? The link on meningioma mentions: "There is a possibility that viruses may be related to meningioma formation, but the relationship is not defined."
Before I retired, I was for many years in charge of a mosquito abatement program. The anti-pesticide folks would each have their horror stories about how the mosquito spraying had made them sick. Curiously, in many situations, their neighborhood had not even been sprayed (fogged). My coworkers and I were exposed to far more chemicals and insecticides. In one situation I was doused with 95% pure Malathion. My shirt was soaked from the spill. It took a shower and a soaking bath to get the oily insecticide off of me. There is a reason that the warning label for pure Malathion is "Caution". The stuff is almost nontoxic to humans. It stinks though.
I guess my point is that cause and effect are frequently hard to determine. Whether x-rays contribute to brain cancer may or may not be true, but dental disease is serious. Dental care (flossing, brushing) is like exercise. It is good for you and it gets easier the more you do it.
I read recently that a lot of cancer is thought to be the result of inflammation in the body. So if you have bad teeth and chronic inflammation in your gums, could it not be possible that the result is both an increased risk for nearby cancers and an increased likelihood of x-rays.
GCV, I agree. I think I read that aspirin is thought to reduce colon cancer because of reduced inflammation. I'm a big believer in exercise, normal weight, dental health, sunshine and just staying busy. Now that I've been retired for a few years, I wonder how I ever found the time to work!
@Dale,
The issue is that this type of correlation study (and all others like it) is simply not definitive in any way. The conundrum is that if A correlates with B and B correlates with C, there is no implied relationship between A and C even though common sense would make it seem to be the case.
In this case, dental x-rays could possibly be the cause of a type of brain cancer but there are other possibilities as well. It could be that the study is too small or just hit a fluke. It could also be that some other process, such as eating apples, could be common to both and people who are zealous about dental care also eat more apples which have insecticide residue that causes the brain cancers. We have known for 3500 plus years that correlation does not equal causation. But unfortunately medical researchers who are MD's with no other credentials have virtually no education, training or skills in designing, conducting and evaluating clinical research. For that reason, medical schools squander a huge amount of research funding by allowing physician researchers to look where the light is best rather than looking where they lost their wallet.
These sorts of articles, promising cancer cures and making associations that don't hold water have little to no place in the public discourse. Robert Bazzell is one of the worst when it comes to assuming that correlations are much more informative than they really are. But just think back to all those cancer cures and medical breakthroughs touted by Bazell. How many of them have come to pass? The articles just pass on useless information without letting people know that it is useless and should not be used to make personal health care decisions.
chris,
why do you feel the need to denegrate physicians in every single one of your posts on here????
are you telling me NO PHD EVER has EVER written an observational study? Willing to bet on it??
Apparently everything in dentistry is harmful now it seems. The x-rays, mercury fillings, bpa white fillings, along with the sodium fluoride first used by Hitler for water/ Jews. That is one of the most potent neurotoxins known.
Life is actually harmful. The longer you life the more likely it becomes you will die. The only real solution is to ban life.
GCV- and don't forget to always wear your tin hat!
Good luck, my Dentist won't touch anyone's teeth unless they get yearly x-rays.
This seems to be the norm now because it is easy insurance income for them.
Same here, even though it appears the ADA has said since 2006 X-rays should not be used for "detecting disease before clinical examination."
Hmm, makes you wonder if they are staying up to date with ADA.
I had one dentist for years who watched potential cavity places, not really cavities. Then one visit I had 6 cavities. Went to another dentist he said I had no cavities and that was 14 years ago. I think the first dentist all of a sudden had bills to pay or something.
Makes a person wonder the motives for sure. I think the procedures will be changing based off this study even if the facts behind it are weak.
Well I got another problem. Got a good job with great dental care back in the 80's. Dentist took his full set of bite wings. Filled root canal ed, crowned and then took another set because I needed a partial lower. But before he could take impressions I would need an oral surgeon take out a wisdom tooth. Surgeon did a full, upper and lower jaw panorama view to see where the root was. Low and behold the I could have pulled it out as it didn't have root. Within a year I noticed a lump in my neck. It steadily grew and in 3 yrs. I had a fist sized tumored thyroid gland taken out. Life has been downhill since, and thyroid medication didn't help. Beware of the x-ray. Note: during all x-rays the lead shielded bib was placed over the chest not the neck.
So let me see if I got this strait Chicory, you had 3 routine dental x-rays. After which you discovered you could do your own oral surgery, because your wisdom tooth had no root. So, was this tooth visible or under a layer of tissue and bone? In 20 yrs of practise, the only wisdom teeth I've seen with no roots are buried in the bone. I believe it's easier to French kiss a cactus then remove these type of rootless non wonders. However, perhaps you moonlight on weekends doing discount gastric bypass surgery in your garage, after all, it is nothing more than just tying the stomach into a big knot, and what's a little cutting between friends? However, you say you had a lump in your neck that you watched grow for 3 years? Pray tell, did you think it was going to bloom into a rose bush? 3 years and you did nothing about it, however, your vast knowledge of medicine tells you it is the direct result of 3 routine dental xrays. I just wonder, how many cigarettes did you smoke in those three years?
I agree with you. I was diagnosed with a thyroid nodule (noncancerous), a year later I went to the dentist. Shortly after my dental exam with xrays it started growing. I was then diagnosed with thyroid cancer, had surgery twice and radioactive iodine treatment. The leading cause of the type of thyroid cancer I had.....exposure to radiation. I will add that I had xrays as a child for a broken arm, but feel like the dental xray triggered something.
I argued long and hard with my dentist and he agreed to just do xrays every three years and I request a lead apron and neck collar for the xrays. My teeth are fine without the xrays, but then I take good care of them daily.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
Chicory, If you got a good job in the '80's I have to assume you were at least 20 years old at the time. In the 40' and 50's (I know through the late 50's), possibly into the 60's, there were a large number of infants and young children irradiated for a number of reasons. Some of the reasons I have found were enlarged thymus glands in infants (possibly irradiated to prevent SIDS), issues with enlarge tonsils and adenoids (sp?), etc. A large number of children were irradiated with fairly substantial amounts of direct radiation in the neck/throat area. At the time, it was an accepted practice. The point is that I had thyroid cancer which cannot be related to dental x-rays. My parents couldn't afford the dentist when I was a child as they did not have dental insurance of any type and it wasn't life threatening. As an adult, I have rarely gone to the dentist (as someone stated, prevention works wonders); however, I was one of the irradiated infants! I happened to be diagnosed with thyroid cancer and all of the sudden, my mother remembered that I had been irradiated as an infant. When I spoke with the endrocrinologist who dianosed the issue, they weren't surprise and stated that they had found a number of patients with thyroid cancer had received large amounts of radiation as a child, not from dental x-rays, but from direct irradiation of the neck and throat area. The study appears to be mute on how many of the individuals were irradiated as very young children or infants since they would not recall those exposures. I don't put much stock in the story that dental x-rays cause thyroid or brain cancer. There are many other unknowns that have been unaddressed and at most the article shows that a scientific study may be necessary, but since many won't know they were exposed to radiation as young children or infants, I am not sure how the study will address all of the potential variables.
The sad part of this article is it will now generate a rash of people not allowing ANY dental xrays for any reason, symptoms or not. We are all a little paranoid about these things and only need a reason to justify that paranoia. Please remember this study is based on old time irradiation when xrays were in their infancy, that type of exposure no longer occurs with todays digital technology....I am much more concerned about my cell phone since I use it every day all day. Remember, early detection is the key....otherwise we are going to see a huge increase in root canals, extractions etc because people will be afraid of a dental xray. Note: typically most decay is symptom free until it reaches the pulp of the tooth....by then it is too late.
Dear KINGOFZED.....quick note, most insurances won't pay for certain dental work without an xray.... they actually require the Dentist to take one before any procedure is perfomed
As an xray technologist, you should ask if the person doing the dental xrays are licensed in the state to take xrays. They should have their license posted in the room or visibly somewhere. Plus, they should ALWAYS put an apron AND thyroid shield on you. If not, they are not practicing good ALARA principles. The thyroid shield is mandatory for children. If in doubt, ask questions.
Actually, the thyroid shield can't be used with panoramic x-rays. It blocks the field of the x-ray. And, to be honest, the training offered by the state, at least here, is of little practical use when it comes to actually taking x-rays in a dental setting. The x-ray machine's controls are designed to limit exposure - unlike in older machines in use when the laws for certification were enacted.
Title should be: "People who have brain MRI's for random indications also have more dental x-rays."
Meningiomas are rarely symptomatic and almost always discovered incidentally on imaging. There is a huge source of undiscussed systematic bias here and results are likely incorrect. Surprised reviewers didn't pick this up.
Several posts here correctly point out some of the weaknesses of both this type of study, and the reporting of statistics.
In the article itself: "Dr. Otis W. Brawley, scientific director of the American Cancer Society, told me “the strongest thing you can say about this study is that there is a suggestion of a link between dental X-rays and meningioma.”
And yet, the title: "Dental X-rays can double brain tumor risk, study finds"
This title is misleading to the public and flat out wrong; regardless of what is said in the article, this is what many readers will take away and it is damaging. It is an egregious offense, please change the title to reflect the power of this study, perhaps something like "Study suggests possible like between dental x-rays and certain brain cancers".
A plea to the media: please take responsibility for reporting the truth accurately in such a way as to be informative without being misleading. People will still read this story with a more accurate, and socially responsible, message.
I suppose I am lucky in a way. The dentist I had as a child did not believe in Xrays for children. SO I never had a dental Xray until about 16 or maybe a little later. I still have had far to many in my life although probably less than others.
The sad truth is that the X-Ray machine is a cash cow for dentists and whether you need an X-Ray or not, if you sit in the chair you're gonna get one, probably several. I doubt most dentists give a rat's ass whether they overexpose a patient since , like most of the medical profession, the thing they're most interested in is the bottom line. Physician heel thyself. Just another reason why we need Obamacare.
NO, the really sad truth is hatred:
Someone who has such disrespect and nasty cynicism for fellow humans. The old "screw everyone" attitude run amuck. Besides if you think what we really need is yet another layer of government bureaucrats who don't give a rats behind about people- namely patients, doctors, and tax payers then you deserve no better than Obamacare and the crumbs you get tossed......none for me, Thank You!!! While this is still America, I opt out.
Just now came form the dentist, had 2 bite-wings done. Will refuse xrays except in emergency situations now that I have this article to show my dentist!!!!!!
That emergency situation will probably mean you will then need the tooth removed or you will need a root canal. If every patient actually listened to their their dental providers, dentists would find it difficult to stay in business. Dentistry is all about prevention. You have the right to decline any treatment a dentist offers you, but ultimately you will be the one in pain at some point if you truly wait for "emergency situations."
The irony is that if you don't get radiographs until you have an "emergency", you will probably have just as many xrays, only more "emergencies". When you do eventually opt for a radiograph and some sort of treatment, it's going to be more expensive than a simple filling.
Hey go ahead. Also, when you get woken up with excruciating pain in 2 or 3 years because you now know how to diagnose dental problems better then him or you bite into a sandwitch and find your teeth came out into the bread. Be sure to also tell the doctor you're going to sue him for making you addicted to painkillers because you decided you know more than his education and experience combined. Plus, then see how many other dentists want to treat you, hope you've decided on the shade of teeth you want in your dentures!
5000 cases out of 300 million people is a very very small risk to begin with. And then how do you find people that did not have X-rays going to the dentist? I grew up in rural Africa and ever there, I had x-rays when I went to the dentist - in the 1970s. I would imagine that in this day and age, any group of people that did not get routine x-rays as part of their dental visit also have many other factors in the life that are not the norm. What is different about these people's lifestyle? Do they live in rural areas and are not exposed to microwave towers? Do they not use a microwave oven at home? Do they eat less processed foods? I would imagine that the people that don't get x-rays as part of their dental maintenance live in parts of America where a lot of other modern aspects of life are missing too.
@GCV: They are merely saying it can double the risk, which I fully understand. X-rays are ionizing radiation, that is, it can break particles into components. Microwave technology used in homes merely excites water molecules through increasing their kinetic energy through vibrational modes. Not nearly the same thing.
It's been known for decades that x-rays can be harmful. I don't know that it doubles the risk, but it's pretty obvious to me that getting x-rays will increase the cancer risk of an individual.
I find this article very comforting to know that I was thrown out of a dentist office years ago when I refused a full-jaw x-ray, the kind that zaps your entire face for about five seconds. He declined to treat me unless I went along with the procedure. I was given a few minutes to change my mind, and when he came back, I said no.
The important thing to remember is that you had a choice of whether or not to continue with treatment. The dentist also had a choice in whether or not they wanted to proceed with providing you dental care. Without the necessary x-rays, there is no way for a dentist to properly diagnose dental disease (cavities) or periodontal disease (gum disease). Add to this the liability of performing irreversible treatment to a tooth without proper diagnostic tools (x-rays)... Please remember, there is a huge difference between cause & effect and a mere correlation in scientific studies.
Face it, we're all going to die of something someday. People have had x-rays all of their lives and never develop a brain tumor. Some people have never seen a dentist in their life and develop a brain tumor. Moderation is the key to pretty much everything. I would think, based on reported stories, that the amount of cell phone use would be far more worrisome than a yearly tooth x-ray. Talk to your dentist before any x-rays are taken. If he refuses to treat you on that criteria alone, then find another dentist.
In some states, it is actually illegal for a dentist to treat a patient without proper x-rays. Pretty much everwhere, dentist can be held liable for missed diagnoses if s/he didn't take x-rays, even if the patient refused.
You are correct Sandy, it's called supervised neglect
Exactly. New patients in my office are told that, if they refuse x-rays, they will not be treated here. We're nice about it, but I have no intention of being held liable for an abscess that should have been caught, with routine x-rays back when it was a tiny cavity, instead.
But, as Cicero was fond of asking, "Cui bono? Who benefits? And under both philosophy and law a proximal benefit trumps a distal benefit. That is, the dentist benefits from taking the x-rays regardless of any benefit or harm to the patient. This is also why the "litigious patient" argument is bogus. If the patient refuses an x-ray, the dentist is off the hook. Period.
Not so. If it is determined that treating the patient without x-rays was malpractice, the dentist is NOT off the hook. Patients can't consent to malpractice. As to who benefits, well, would you rather have a small filling, or a root canal and crown or extraction? Both the dentist and the patient benefit - the dentist from avoiding malpractice and litigation, and the patient from receiving the least invasive, cheapest treatment possible. Root canals, BTW, generally involve quite a few x-rays.
As a registered dental hygienist I can't wait for my patients to come into our office freaking out about this article. The study that was performed is ridiculous. Patients never remember when the last x-rays were taken.. and the study is asking them to think back many years and determine themselves how many x-rays they have had?? I guarantee that not one of the people involved in the study reported an accurate answer.
Most dental offices now take digital x-rays , which are 1/4 the radiation of the traditional film x-rays. Also, we do not (at my dental office) insist people take x-rays just to get insurance money. We take routine bitewing xrays once a year because if you have decay starting it can move into the nerve of the tooth within a year. Would you rather have a small filling or a root canal and crown because you refused x-rays for 2 years? I am pretty sure my cell phone will give me cancer before dental x-rays will.
Blah, blah, blah, technology is a double edged sword and there is no changing this reality.
"Significantly, the study is the weakest type of epidemiology, a so-called “case control” study. The researchers interviewed 1,433 people diagnosed with meningioma and compared them with 1,350 people with no such diagnosis. The two groups were matched for age, gender, race, income and places of residence. In a tiny portion of the cases the researchers actually looked at dental records. But, most often, they asked the study subjects – whose average age was 57 -- to recall their history of dental X-rays going back to childhood."
This article is not based on scientific research, it is based on people's memory of their radiation history. All people need is another reason NOT to go to the dentist and this sensationalist article is providing one. Dentists are mandated by their states to maintain complete and up to date records that include current z rays, so if patients refuse the dentist may have to refuse to see them.
Many people wouldn't have difficulty remembering how many x-ray exposures they have had, why? Those of us who grew up with dental insurance (and parents who cared about our teeth) made sure we went to the dentist every six months, like clockwork. We had our bite-wing x rays every year, like clockwork. Do the math, that is a hell of a lot of radiation exposure by the time a person is 50 years old, and so on. By middle-age, a lot of people having thyroid issues as well.... rarely will a hygenist put a thyroid shield on you before the bite wings are done (closer to the head, and thus the mouth) they would have to sanitize those shields and don't want to bother and dentist doesn't want the extra expense of thyroid shields. You can buy your own online, I suggest people do this and bring them in to dentist for use during bite-wings - at least you can spare your very sensitive thyroid from repeat exposures.
Renata, MD (Internal medicine)
Most dental x-ray aprons are made with the thyroid collar built in. If not, there are accessory thyroid collars that can be used. All x-ray aprons should be sanitized after use with a patient, no matter what their proximity to patient's mouth. Dentists take the same oath you did to "do no harm."
Craig, DDS (actual dentist)
When I was a kid, the big department store in Des Moines had a shoe-fitting fluoroscope. I bet I really got zapped by that machine. Today's x-ray exposures are so much less.
You did. They outlawed that device quite some time ago after they started realizing that it might not be the best use of radiation!
Oh, great...one more thing to worry about - since I just had repeat dental x-rays yesterday! I know, I know, its the ones from earlier in my life (which were many) that I have to worry about...sigh!