OT: Link between Dental X-rays and Cancer

chunkyfrog wrote:I see my dentist twice a year; he does the bitewings--and FLUORIDE.
A life without natural teeth is not ideal--it is worth the small risk, snd also the moderate expense.
Neglect your teeth--it costs a lot--money, pain, and many related health problems.

Agree!!! I really want to keep my teeth as long as I can, and am willing to do a reasonable level of care to make that happen.

jnk,
I don't have the time to research my statement about medical office magazines beyond one page of a quick Google search. I do know that in looking though OSHA materials from classes the wife has attended they recommend that medical offices either purge their magazines often or completely forgo them altogether. Here are some quotes with links to associated articles from page one of my two minute Google search. I assume using different key words or looking past page one might result in different information or conflicting information but as two sources are from Canadian and U.S.A. OSHA reports I would call it plausible to have at least moderate concern toward all facets of cross contamination while going to a doctors office.

Personally I am more likely to skip picking up a magazine in the dentists waiting room rather than refusing an x-ray that may allow them to treat something before it became a serious issue requiring a significantly invasive procedure. The best part of this subject is a different combination of keywords in a Google search would probably offer a complete opposite opinion from a majority of sources it chose from thus using the internet creates a stalemate most times. Thus the idea of a free society where I can leave the magazine on the table and someone else can refuse the x-ray. We make our own choices and live with the consequences.

http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/pandemic/re ... elines.pdf
Waiting Room
Soft toys, cloth seating, and magazines should be removed from the waiting and exam rooms

http://blogs.hcpro.com/osha/2010/02/ic- ... ting-room/
The Infection Control Manual for the Physician’s Office addresses toys and magazines in the waiting room suggesting medical facilities should either avoid them all together,

http://health.yahoo.net/rodale/PVN/don- ... r-s-office
Consider bringing your own entertainment.
This may seem a bit extreme, but if there is an outbreak of a particular contagious illness, such as H1N1 or even seasonal flu, in your community you could go as far as bringing your own books and magazines into the waiting room in the name of preventing flu. If you're taking a child to the doctor's office during peak flu or cold season in your area, you can also pack his or her own toys, crayons, or coloring books to keep the child entertained without risking exposure to more germs.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/hea ... le1216469/

If you're looking to steal holiday recipes from the latest magazine, you'll have better luck at the dentist than at the hospital - at least in Toronto.

The tables in the waiting areas throughout Women's College Hospital - once covered with magazines - now hold signs explaining the absence of reading materials. Hospital staff decided that magazines, because they cannot be disinfected, can spread diseases such as C. difficile and influenza.

In the case of Women's College Hospital, the removal of shared reading materials from waiting areas was prompted not by science, but by an assumption of how disease can be spread through contact with paper surfaces.

"If you saw a used paper tissue lying on a waiting table, you wouldn't pick it up, would you? But when a magazine or newspaper is being held for a period of time, people may be coughing, may be sneezing," says Jim Ruderman, chief of staff at the hospital.

http://medicalofficetoday.com/content_f ... ffice.aspx
Keep the number of objects on your waiting room tables (magazines, newspapers, brochures, etc.) to a minimum or toss them frequently, particularly during flu season or if you see a large number of infected people handling them.

The Huffington Post article has this in it.

The new research links regular dental imaging to one of the most common types of brain tumors and suggests adults who were regularly exposed to X-rays in the past, before dosages were lowered, might have an especially pronounced risk.

The Pubmed article contains this bit, already quoted once above.

Exposure to some dental x-rays performed in the past, when radiation exposure was greater than in the current era, appears to be associated with an increased risk of intracranial meningioma. As with all sources of artificial ionizing radiation, considered use of this modifiable risk factor may be of benefit to patients.

My emphasis. In other words, there apparently is no data analyzing the risk from the current dosage levels.

We are exposed to natural radiation every day. IMO, refusing to accept dental x-rays is an overreaction to a very low probability tumor in the first place [7.8 per 100,000 per year, http://www.clevelandclinicmeded.com/med ... in-tumors/], but to each his own.

I found this post while researching a new CPAP machine for myself. Let me start of by saying that I am a licensed Radiologic Technologist and I know just about everything you would want to know about ionizing radiation as I am allowed by law to dispense it. This is also my first post to this forum.

What I got from the article is that PT's exposed to ionizing radiation from older dental X-ray equipment have a higher incidence for Meningiomas. This is with the assumption that the older equipment emitted higher levels of radiation than was medically necessary. Let me tell you now that this is true of all older X-ray equipment but there is a operator factor to consider. Older equipment was not digital and used film. These older machines gave patients a higher dose of radiation to achieve a diagnostic image.

Newer digital x-ray equipment is able to dispense lower amounts of ionizing radiation while still obtaining a diagnostic medical image. This too is still operator dependent as you can still get someone who does not know what they're doing and using Digital Equipment to overexpose you. I've had many trips to my dentist recently and asked one day what the exposure settings were on the x-ray machine that they were using. To my surprise the hygienist had no idea. They are not trained to dispense ionizing radiation. They simply take an X-ray using the settings that the manufacturer leaves in the machine.

I asked to see the machine so I could see the settings. They were using 60kV@4mAs which is high for teeth. I can use that same technique to take an X-ray image of you're lower leg for example. 50kV@2.5mAs is sufficient to image a finger to give you some comparison. I informed the dentist of my findings and told him that it would be of great benefit to his patients to have the manufacture come in and readjust the settings for something more appropriate for teeth. I also informed him of the risks from giving too much ionizing radiation unnecessarily and that they should invest in some lead lined eye ware to go along with the lead aprons they were using. (you're eyes are one of the most sensitive parts of you're body along with you're thyroid) You'll find that allot of physicians are not aware of the dangers associated with ionizing radiation and those that are are severly under rating the amount of exposure their PT's are getting. They really have no formal training in Radiology and the risks of ionizing radiation.

So what do we take way from this? There is no "safe" amount of ionizing radiation. It is always to you're advantage to limit you're exposure however you can. Whether using lead protective wear to reduce exposure to areas that do not need it or by electing to pass on having certain exams done (X-rays, CT scans, Nuclear Med tests). It all comes down to risk vs benefit. You would not want to pass up on a head CT if you were having signs of a stroke because you were worried about the large amount of radiation that you'll get from one. The stroke will most likely kill you long before the late term somatic effects of the radiation will. So it's always best to make an informed decision, but try not to take some of these articles and studies too seriously. Some are very limited in their scope and articles on websites like the Huntington Post are there for "page hits" and not necessarily for your benefit.

Just my .02 cents

hueyville wrote: Those magazines being handled by every persons hands washed or not, drug from waiting room to patient rooms and back, sneezed on, and generally laying around for months collecting whatever germ the last 20 readers came to see the doctor for is something to think about at all medical facilities. My smart phone sure has eliminated a lot of the boredom in the waiting room.

I've thought about this and still pick up a magazine or two. I won't any longer. I'm also concerned about door knobs in public places, wagon handles, gasoline pump handles, etc. Some places supply the anti-bacterial wipes, but so many times they are out of them. I'm seriously considering buying cheap plastic gloves and keeping them in my car. I'm putting them on my shopping list.

Of course, I wonder how I've survived all these years... never thought about any of this 20 years ago.

Don't some of those germs on the magazines die a natural death after a certain exposure to the environment?

StuUnderPressure wrote:Don't some of those germs on the magazines die a natural death after a certain exposure to the environment?

a Mayo dude wrote:"Experiments with specific cold and flu germs have shown potential survival times ranging from a few minutes to 48 hours or more. How long such germs remain capable of infecting you in day-to-day life is harder to say." -- http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/infect ... se/AN01238

Maybe the dentists' magazines should be x-rayed to give all the viruses cancer.

Just trying to keep on topic.