San Diego Holistic Dentist Welcomes Biological Dentist Dr. Stacy Godes to The Center for Natural Dentistry

The Center for Natural Dentistry (www.NaturalDentistry.us) has taken another significant step in it’s fight to protect and preserve the health of it’s patients by hiring Dr. Stacy Godes to join Dr. Marvin Pantangco at San Diego’s prestigious holistic dental practice.

November 3, 2011 – San Diego holistic dental practice, The Center for Natural Dentistry, is pleased to announce the addition of biological dentist Dr. Stacy Godes to it’s team.

The Center for Natural Dentistry — a holistic dental practice in San Diego integrating natural procedures with traditional science-based dentistry — is focused on improving whole-body wellness through proper, effective dental care with an eye on improving the health of it’s patients.

The addition of Dr. Stacy Godes provides two benefits to existing and new patients:

• It provides patients with another skilled, experienced doctor to work with (The Center for Natural Dentistry was consistently booked up to five weeks in advance. Dr. Godes’ addition provides more opportunities for patients to schedule an appointment)
• It adds ozone therapy to the practice’s alternative dental offerings. Ozone Oxygen/ozone therapy, when introduced into the living system, disinfects the area treated, both safely and effectively. Treating with ozone in dentistry can increase blood flow, enhanced immune response, and provide a more rapid healing response. It’s often used as an alternative method of fighting cavities and periodontal disease.

“Being a holistic dental office, we never place mercury fillings,” says Dr. Marvin, “but it goes beyond that. We are seeking to improve and enhance the health and wellbeing of our patients. We never perform root canals, we follow a strict extraction protocol to prevent bone infection, we use non-surgical methods to treat gum disease, we are extremely cautious when removing mercury fillings, and we never use metals in our restorations. We also test our patients for biocompatibility before using any new materials… we are holistic dentists in every sense of the word. Adding Dr. Godes to the team takes us to a new level and allows to provide even better service to our patients.”

Dr. Stacy Godes (pronounced ‘Goddess’) chose to pursue a career in the dental profession as a way to help people achieve their goals related to overall health and well-being; a career choice that she says is exceptionally rewarding for her at The Center for Natural Dentistry as our newest holistic dentist. Combining the art and science of dentistry into a tool for healing is not just an interest, but a passion for Dr. Godes, as she works to promote health and healing of her patients.

Trained at University of the Pacific in general dentistry and at the IAOMT and IABDM in holistic dentistry, Dr. Godes is a valuable addition to the team and an asset to our patients.

“At The Center for Natural Dentistry, we help patients who have an appreciation for natural health as well as patients who have suffered from long-standing systemic health problems. Many of our patients have tried traditional medicine with unsatisfying results. We offer an alternative look – a look into how their mouth affects their overall health — with some amazing results.”

To celebrate the addition of Dr. Godes to The Center for Natural Dentistry team, they are offering a FREE 30-minute phone consultation to anyone who would like to know if holistic dentistry is right for them or to patients who have long-standing systemic health issues and are looking for answers. If you have “tried it all” when it comes to improving your health, don’t give up. Call for a free consultation to find out how holistic dentistry may be able to help you: 760-536-1199.

About The Center for Natural Dentistry:
The Center for Natural Dentistry provides San Diego residents with safe, effective alternative dental care. Dr. Marvin and Dr. Godes offer holistic dentistry without using toxic chemicals, expensive surgeries, and needless drilling. For information — including a free phone consultation — visit http://NaturalDentistry.us or call (760) 536-1199.

Contact:
Dr. Marvin
The Center for Natural Dentistry
760-536-1199

http://naturaldentistry.us/

###

The World Health Organization urges “switch” away from amalgam

Great news from Charlie Brown at Consumers for Dental Choice. I can’t say it much better than he did, so you can read his letter verbatim, below.

In a clear sign that dentistry’s amalgam era is fading, the World Health Organization (“WHO”) just released its long-awaited report on dental amalgam.  In Future Use of Materials for Dental Restoration, WHO urges “a switch in use of dental materials” away from amalgam.

“[F]or many reasons,” WHO explains, “restorative materials alternative to dental amalgam are desirable.”  The report describes three of these reasons in detail:

• WHO determines that amalgam releases a “significant amount of mercury”:  WHO concludes that amalgam poses a serious environmental health problem because amalgam releases a “significant amount of mercury” into the environment, including the atmosphere, surface water, groundwater, and soil.  WHO says “When released from dental amalgam use into the environment through these pathways, mercury is transported globally and deposited.  Mercury releases may then enter the human food chain especially via fish consumption.”
• WHO determines that amalgam raises “general health concerns”:  While the report acknowledges that a few dental trade groups still believe amalgam is safe for all, the WHO report reaches a very different conclusion: “Amalgam has been associated with general health concerns.”  The report observes, “According to the Norwegian Dental Biomaterials Adverse Reaction Unit, the majority of cases of side-effects of dental filling materials are linked with dental amalgam.”
• WHO determines that “materials alternative to dental amalgam are available”:  WHO concludes that “Materials alternative to dental amalgam are available” – and cites many studies indicating that they are superior to amalgam.  For example, WHO says “recent data suggest that RBCs [resin-based composites] perform equally well” as amalgam.  And compomers have a higher survival rate, says WHO, citing a study finding that 95% of compomers and 92% of amalgams survive after 4 years.  Perhaps more important than the survival of the filling, WHO asserts that “Adhesive resin materials allow for less tooth destruction and, as a result, a longer survival of the tooth itself.”

We have come a long way.  Less than a year ago, dental trade groups were circulating an unedited and unreviewed draft of this report to government officials, implying that it was WHO’s final position.  But the draft was riddled with factual errors and scientifically unsupported claims.  Consumers for Dental Choice – working with non-governmental organizations, scientists, and environmentalists from around the globe – organized a letter-writing campaign to insist that the draft be immediately withdrawn, accurately rewritten, and properly reviewed.

And it worked!  Now WHO has removed all claims of amalgam’s safety.  Now WHO has committed itself to “work for reduction of mercury and the development of a healthy environment.”  Now “WHO will facilitate the work for a switch in use of dental materials.”

Thank you to everybody who urged WHO to take this important step to protect future generations from dental mercury.

It’s time for the U.S. FDA to catch up with the world – and we need your help.  FDA’s support for amalgam is radically inconsistent with WHO’s new position.  Please contact Dr. Jeff Shuren, Director of the FDA Center for Devices, at

Email:  jeff.shuren@fda.hhs.gov

Fax:  301-847-8149 & 301-847-8109

Telephone:  301-796-5900

Mail: 10903 New Hampshire Ave., WO66-5431, Room 5442, Silver Spring MD 20993-0002
Here is a sample letter:
Dear Dr. Shuren:

In its recent report, the World Health Organization concludes that dental amalgam releases a “significant amount of mercury” and raises “general health concerns.”  In light of these serious problems, WHO calls on health authorities like FDA to take action now: “Health authorities can play an active role in advocacy for use of dental materials alternative to amalgam…Directives can be set up for provision of dental care incorporating concerns for oral health and the environment.”   

The WHO report says “Materials alternative to dental amalgam are available.”  In particular, “Alternative restorative materials of sufficient quality are available for use in the deciduous [baby] dentition of children” – the population whose developing neurological systems are most susceptible to the neurotoxic effects of dental mercury according to FDA.  So there is no excuse for subjecting children to the risks associated with dental mercury exposure.

FDA needs to stop amalgam use in children immediately and join WHO in working for a switch to the many mercury-free alternatives to amalgam.    

Sincerely,
Your name

Thank you for working with us to protect everyone worldwide from mercury fillings!

– Charlie, 18 October 2011

Charles G. Brown
National Counsel, Consumers for Dental Choice
President, World Alliance for Mercury-Free Dentistry
316 F St. NE, Suite 210, Washington DC 20002
Telephone: 202-544-6333
Fax: 202-544-6331

Help Stop the Use of Mercury in a Major California City

On September 20, 2011 at 5:00 PM, the city of Long Beach will hold a city council meeting that has the potential to radically alter the way Californians are affected by mercury amalgam… and they could use your help.

At the urging of Californians for Green Dentistry, the city council in Long Beach will discuss the idea of requiring all dentists to install amalgam separators to help protect our environment and to voluntarily cease use of Dental Amalgam, implement Best Management Practices and install
dental amalgam separators to catch spilled mercury.

This is a potential watershed case for the fight against mercury amalgam, and they are asking for YOUR help.

The following message is an abbreviated version of the email sent straight from Californians for Green Dentistry. Below that is a link to download the memo issued by the City of Long Beach.

Due to the resistance that will becoming from the Harbor Dental Society, it is imperative that we show a strong diversified group of people – what we need – Scientists, Doctors, Mercury Free Dentists, Victims, Environmentalists – and activists.

We will be allowed 3 minutes each to speak with no ability to yeild time to another speaker.  Therefore we must be well prepared and on our “A” Game!

We need to address why this is important for Long Beach.  The city is a dominant maritime <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maritime>  center of the United States and was recently named “Aquatic Capital of the Nation.” It wields substantial influence critical to the global economy <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_globalization> . The Port of Long Beach <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Long_Beach>  is the United States’ second busiest container port and one of the world’s largest shipping ports.

Broc the Chief of Staff for VM Lowenthal suggested that we fill the room and have at least 7 speakers to go up- from there we listen to the opposition and then continue to refute whatever they say – and keep the most dynamic speakers for the end…to strategically let council here us last…there is no need to sign in so we just go up to the podium when the issue comes up…

If there was ever a time when we NEED ALL HANDS ON DECK- THIS IS IT…With the FDA hearing 2 days later, we can report on the action of Long Beach…I hope that you will all call – or email me with your confirmation to attend – THIS CAN TURN THE TIDE ON THE ENTIRE ISSUE….

PLEASE ADDEND AND IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS CALL ME…310-923-4116  - WE NEED YOU NOW MORE THAN EVER BEFORE!

With much gratitude,

Anita, Kristy, & Marisa – Californians for Green Dentistry

Thanks,

Dr. Marvin

Click to Download the Memo from the City of Long Beach

Mercury Amalgam Fillings in Long Beach

FAN-Australia Drops a Bombshell on Fluoridation

Media Release: Brisbane, Australia 4 April  2011

 Merilyn Haines, the director of the newly formed group FAN-Australia (Fluoride Action Network Australia), has found some startling statistics buried deep in official research material by ARCPOH (The Australian Research Centre Population Oral Health at the Adelaide Dental School) that could scuttle the water fluoridation program once and for all.

 Haines has found in the ARCPOH statistics that the permanent teeth of children in largely unfluoridated  (<5% before 2009) Queensland were erupting on average two years earlier than the children in the rest of Australia, which is largely fluoridated (see the figure below). A two-year delay would negate all the small reductions in tooth decay claimed by dental researchers since 1990. In other words fluoridation doesn’t work. Any difference in tooth decay claimed to be due to fluoride is simply an artifact of the delayed eruption caused by fluoride.

According to Professor Paul Connett, director of the Fluoride Action Network, who is currently on a fluoride-tour of New Zealand, “Critics of fluoridation, like Dr. Hardy Limeback in Toronto, have long pointed out that any reduced tooth decay touted by promoters could easily be accounted for by the delayed eruption of the teeth. Even when this argument received strong experimental support from Komarek et al. in 2005, this has still has been ignored by those promoting fluoridation. But they cannot ignore it any longer: the figures of the dental department research team most associated with the promotion of fluoridation in Australia (and beyond) demonstrate that this delay is real.”

Less teeth erupted for any given age would mean less surfaces available for tooth decay to have taken place. A delayed eruption of one – two years would account for the small reductions claimed in ALL the US and Australian studies published since 1990 (Brunelle and Carlos, 1990; Slade et al., 1996; Spencer et al., 1996; Armfield et al., 2009; Armfield, 2010). These studies have found reductions ranging from 0.12 of one permanent tooth surfaces saved in Western Australia (Spencer et al., 1996) to 0.6 permanent tooth surface saved in the largest survey ever conducted in the US (Brunelle and Carlos, 1990). This is not very much when you consider that there are five surfaces to the chewing teeth and four to the cutting teeth, and by the time all the child’s teeth have erupted there are a total of 128 tooth surfaces. One tooth surface saved amounts to less than 1% of all the surfaces in a child’s mouth. Now even this small benefit has evaporated.

 More on the history

In 1999, the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia’s peak Medical Research body, stated that, “evidence exists that tooth eruption is delayed in fluoridated areas. It has been suggested that a proper comparison of caries rates should involve children one year older in fluoridated areas than in non- fluoridated areas.”

 In 2000, the York Review pointed out that none of the studies that they had reviewed had controlled for “the number of erupted teeth per child” (McDonagh et al., 2000, p.24).

 In 2005, Komarek et al.  did control for eruption of teeth and reported no difference in decay between children living in Belgium receiving fluoride supplements (and those who weren’t) that was relatable to fluoride exposure (as measured by the severity of dental fluorosis).

 In 2009, Peiris et al. reported that children in largely fluoridated Australia had a delay in “dental age” of 0.82 years compared to children in largely unfluoridated UK. However, the authors did not discuss the possible reasons for this delay and the number of children involved in the study (about 80 in each country) was not very large.

 2011. Now the bombshell – the delay has been found and it is in the official statistics.   ARCPOH has failed to respond to several inquiries on this matter.  According to Haines, “Surely, this must end water fluoridation. If it doesn’t work what’s the point of putting this toxic substance into the drinking water and what reason can they possibly have for forcing it on people who don’t want it?”

 However, this isn’t just about teeth. The finding could be even more significant than that. If fluoride causes a delayed eruption of the teeth then the most likely mechanism for doing so is fluoride’s ability to lower thyroid function (see chapter 8 in the 2006 National Research Council review, “Fluoride in Drinking Water.” According to Connett,   “Lowered thyroid function in infants would mean slower growth of their tissues and could explain the 24 studies that have found an association between lowered IQ in children and exposure to moderate levels of fluoride in China, India, Iran and Mexico.”

 It also raises the possibility that millions of people in fluoridated countries suffering from hypothyroidism have had this condition caused, or exacerbated, by exposure to fluoridated water.  Haines’ asks “If ingesting fluoride delays tooth eruption for 1 to 2 years what other effects is it having on our bodies?”

 Meanwhile, if swallowing fluoride does not reduce tooth decay, why would any reasonable person, decision maker or regulatory official continue to sanction adding fluoride to the public water supply? 

  Source – Published and unpublished data from 2003- 2004 Australian Child Dental Health Surveys
Media Release sent by Queenslanders For Safe Water on behalf of Fluoride Action Network Australia Inc.

FAN-Australia Drops a Bombshell on Fluoridation

Media Release: Brisbane, Australia 4 April  2011

Merilyn Haines, the director of the newly formed group FAN-Australia (Fluoride Action Network Australia), has found some startling statistics buried deep in official research material by ARCPOH (The Australian Research Centre Population Oral Health at the Adelaide Dental School) that could scuttle the water fluoridation program once and for all.

Haines has found in the ARCPOH statistics that the permanent teeth of children in largely unfluoridated  (<5% before 2009) Queensland were erupting on average two years earlier than the children in the rest of Australia, which is largely fluoridated (see the figure below). A two-year delay would negate all the small reductions in tooth decay claimed by dental researchers since 1990. In other words fluoridation doesn’t work. Any difference in tooth decay claimed to be due to fluoride is simply an artifact of the delayed eruption caused by fluoride.

According to Professor Paul Connett, director of the Fluoride Action Network, who is currently on a fluoride-tour of New Zealand, “Critics of fluoridation, like Dr. Hardy Limeback in Toronto, have long pointed out that any reduced tooth decay touted by promoters could easily be accounted for by the delayed eruption of the teeth. Even when this argument received strong experimental support from Komarek et al. in 2005, this has still has been ignored by those promoting fluoridation. But they cannot ignore it any longer: the figures of the dental department research team most associated with the promotion of fluoridation in Australia (and beyond) demonstrate that this delay is real.”

Less teeth erupted for any given age would mean less surfaces available for tooth decay to have taken place. A delayed eruption of one – two years would account for the small reductions claimed in ALL the US and Australian studies published since 1990 (Brunelle and Carlos, 1990; Slade et al., 1996; Spencer et al., 1996; Armfield et al., 2009; Armfield, 2010). These studies have found reductions ranging from 0.12 of one permanent tooth surfaces saved in Western Australia (Spencer et al., 1996) to 0.6 permanent tooth surface saved in the largest survey ever conducted in the US (Brunelle and Carlos, 1990). This is not very much when you consider that there are five surfaces to the chewing teeth and four to the cutting teeth, and by the time all the child’s teeth have erupted there are a total of 128 tooth surfaces. One tooth surface saved amounts to less than 1% of all the surfaces in a child’s mouth. Now even this small benefit has evaporated.

More on the history

In 1999, the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia’s peak Medical Research body, stated that, “evidence exists that tooth eruption is delayed in fluoridated areas. It has been suggested that a proper comparison of caries rates should involve children one year older in fluoridated areas than in non- fluoridated areas.”

In 2000, the York Review pointed out that none of the studies that they had reviewed had controlled for “the number of erupted teeth per child” (McDonagh et al., 2000, p.24).  

In 2005, Komarek et al.  did control for eruption of teeth and reported no difference in decay between children living in Belgium receiving fluoride supplements (and those who weren’t) that was relatable to fluoride exposure (as measured by the severity of dental fluorosis).  

In 2009, Peiris et al. reported that children in largely fluoridated Australia had a delay in “dental age” of 0.82 years compared to children in largely unfluoridated UK. However, the authors did not discuss the possible reasons for this delay and the number of children involved in the study (about 80 in each country) was not very large. 

2011. Now the bombshell – the delay has been found and it is in the official statistics.   ARCPOH has failed to respond to several inquiries on this matter.  According to Haines, “Surely, this must end water fluoridation. If it doesn’t work what’s the point of putting this toxic substance into the drinking water and what reason can they possibly have for forcing it on people who don’t want it?”

However, this isn’t just about teeth. The finding could be even more significant than that. If fluoride causes a delayed eruption of the teeth then the most likely mechanism for doing so is fluoride’s ability to lower thyroid function (see chapter 8 in the 2006 National Research Council review, “Fluoride in Drinking Water.” According to Connett,   “Lowered thyroid function in infants would mean slower growth of their tissues and could explain the 24 studies that have found an association between lowered IQ in children and exposure to moderate levels of fluoride in China, India, Iran and Mexico.”

It also raises the possibility that millions of people in fluoridated countries suffering from hypothyroidism have had this condition caused, or exacerbated, by exposure to fluoridated water.  Haines’ asks “If ingesting fluoride delays tooth eruption for 1 to 2 years what other effects is it having on our bodies?”

Meanwhile, if swallowing fluoride does not reduce tooth decay, why would any reasonable person, decision maker or regulatory official continue to sanction adding fluoride to the public water supply? 

 Source – Published and unpublished data from 2003- 2004 Australian Child Dental Health Surveys

Media Release sent by Queenslanders For Safe Water on behalf of Fluoride Action Network Australia Inc.