The exciting part is that these have the potential to become our fountain of youth. What if you lost your leg and could just grow a new one, or your liver failed and you could just replace it with an identical one that was totally compatible. Instead of an artificial valve that might eventually fail, you could grow a brand new heart. You could get a new set of teeth! I think I could be due for a new brain. This is all completely theoretical, of course. Growing new limbs and organs is right out of Star Trek, but totally out of the realm of possibility at this point. All that the researchers are hoping to do now is to trigger the stem cells to produce different tissue types needed for various purposes, such as muscle tissue or pancreatic tissue, rather than an entire structure.

The concern is that a lot of research needs to be done, because these things are much more complicated than you can even imagine. So where do you get these stem cells for your research? Fetal tissue comes to mind. That’s just a slick term for unborn babies. They’re full of stem cells. Imagine harvesting the bodies of unborn babies for scientific research. It sounds like a plot for a horror movie. However, in spite of the fact that you can get plenty of stem cells that are just as good from the umbilical cord, some people insist on using “fetal tissue”. Interestingly, those are usually the people that are trying to save laboratory rats from the same fate.

Another concern is that you need your own stem cells to produce your own tissue, so if you didn’t happen to save your umbilical cord, are you just out of luck? It turns out that you can obtain stem cells from many other sources. Bone marrow is a common one, and cells from the area you want to repair. It has been discovered that the pulp from baby teeth and wisdom teeth also contain stem cells. This is exciting to some because you can so easily obtain your own stem cells well after the umbilical cord is long gone. Dr. Shinya Yamanaka developed a process to turn skin cells into pluripotential cells. According to Dr. Michael Rethman, chairman of the ADA Council on Scientific Affairs, “As time passes, this and similar techniques will be refined so that by the time pluripotential cells come into widespread therapeutic use, obtaining the needed stem cells will likely be fairly straightforward”. Yet another reason not to pursue the controversial fetal stem cell research.

Dental stem cell research is still in its infancy. Many predictions concerning its use are not based in current evidence. Dr. Jeremy Mao, a professor of dental medicine and director of the Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine Laboratory at Columbia University, has high hopes for the use of dental stem cells. “Some of the technologies may happen 10 years down the road but others may happen within 10 years.” However, Pamela Robey, PhD., head of the Craniofacial and Skeletal Diseases Branch, National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, says “What we do know is the cells from dental pulp in baby or wisdom teeth have the ability to make dentin and pulp, and they might have the ability to make bone, but right now that is all we really know for sure.”

As of now there are no human trials being conducted using dental stem cells and there are no clinical applications. In spite of that, many people want to preserve their wisdom teeth, or their child’s baby teeth on the chance that claims such as Dr. Mao’s might have some basis. The American Dental Association has no official position or provision for the preserving of these teeth for possible future use, but neither do they discourage it. It is up to the individual dentist if he chooses to collaborate with private stem cell banking companies, following their protocols as a service to any patients that might request it.

So at this point, stem cell science is pretty much theoretical. There are very few viable applications. If you want to try to confirm any wild claims and expectations you hear, you can look up www.clinicaltrials.gov or the National Institutes of Health at http://stemcells.nih.gov/info. Live long and prosper.

Dr. Moulton’s article was published in the Desert Valley Times, June 2009

Our best hope to remain healthy from now on lies in prevention. Forget about those expensive operations. They will be reserved for congressmen and other federal employees. Common sense lifestyle disciplines can become life savers. Exercising and avoiding tobacco, alcohol, and junk food could be the mainstays of our survival, but we must be persistent. For instance, if you have a family history of diabetes, it has been proven that the sooner and more consistently you refrain from refined sugars, the later in life the disease might surface.

We know what obvious health hazards street drugs are, but are prescription drugs any safer? Just because they aren’t smuggled across the border, doesn’t mean they don’t have serious side effects and stress your body daily. One particularly dangerous category is nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS), such as aspirin, ibuprofen, and acetaminophen. They seem safe and they’re easy to buy, but constant use can cause serious digestive, kidney, and liver damage.

With national healthcare, drugs will become more and more the treatment of choice. They are quicker and easier, and can be prescribed by physician’s assistants rather than physicians. The drug companies have realized this and have lobbied heavily for the health plan, but this could lead to many health repercussions from drug overuse.

Take responsibility for your own health and educate yourself to make wise choices. Research any prescriptions you receive and evaluate the side effects, whether the drug is appropriate, if you are allergic, how necessary it is, and if it reacts unfavorably with something else you may be taking. Be very selective with a goal of eventually eliminating as many medications as possible. Watch for alternative health practices such as natural supplements, spinal adjustments, relaxation therapies, and infra red.

Study all the latest developments in well-being. We have done many articles on health, such as the dangers of iron, fluoride, bone density meds, and vaccinations, which can be found on our website, moultonddsmesquite.com. We are planning future articles on other subjects such as sleep apnea and micro circulation.

Realize the role of your dental condition in your overall health. The comfort and function of your teeth are important, however, their influence on the rest of your body is underestimated. I’ve read claims that from 73% to 90% of all disease stems from dental problems. The biggest danger is from gum disease, but there are other important factors such as temporomandibular dysfunction, airway obstruction, and toxic restorative materials.

Oh, and I do have one more healthcare tip. Every chance you get, vote those socialists out of office.

Dr. Moulton’s article was published in the Desert Valley Times,
March 30th, 2010

We know it is just a drop in the bucket, but besides the few we are able to help, the main effect is to raise public awareness to this growing concern. I’m often amazed at how many parents don’t even realize their children are having dental problems, and that there are policies and programs designed for their benefit. School programs, Medicaid, and family service programs are some of your options, but the main thing is to just get them in somewhere. If you’re unsure of where to turn, contact your dentist for suggestions. At our office, we do all treatment of children under the age of four at no charge, free children’s screenings, and we donate all treatment on children under 19 who have been approved by the Virgin Valley Family Services at 346-7277.

ADA President Ron Tankersley, in an address to the Henry Schein Dental Products Corporation, the main contributor of materials and supplies to GKAS, said, “Give Kids a Smile highlights to policymakers the challenges that low-income families have in getting access to dental care.” With all respect to Dr Tankersley, this sounds a lot like putting all your hopes and trust in “policymakers”and government agencies to take care of your children. If you do that, I’m afraid you’ll be in for a big disappointment.

Instead, I would like to issue my own statement: “In Mesquite, Children’s Dental Health Month will be held over for the rest of the year. Parents, take care of your children’s dental health needs. The only challenge you have now is to put them in the car and drive them to the office.”

Dr. Moulton’s article was published in the Desert Valley Times,
March 9th, 2010

Because of the limitations in existing educational facilities, the yearly enrollment in U.S. dental schools has steadily gone from 3600 in 1960 to only 4700 last year. That’s not much of an increase in the last 50 years, leaving a shortage of dentists, especially with the baby-boomers starting to retire. Almost 40% of all dentists are 55 or older. That shortage is being felt mainly in rural areas at present, but will gradually extend to more populated communities.

Now there is more interest in dental education, and there are economic factors that have caused the number of dental school applicants to recently increase dramatically. Back in 1988 there were barely enough applicants to fill the dental schools, causing seven of them to close, and as recently as five years ago it was relatively easy to get in. However, in 2008 there were three times as many applicants as there were enrollments, and that’s expected to continue its upward trend.

There is a little bit of response to this increased demand as five new dental schools are in the early planning stages. The schools under consideration are at Midwestern University in Downers Grove, Illinois, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center in El Paso, Texas, University of Arkansas in Little Rock, Arkansas, University if New England in Portland, Maine, and University of Southern Nevada, which has campuses in Henderson, Nevada and South Jordan, Utah.

“Dentistry as a profession currently has great appeal,” said Dr. William K. Lobb, vice chair of the ADA Council on Dental Education and Licensure, and dean if the Marquette University School of Dentistry. “With a robust applicant pool willing to invest in dental education, I am sure these institutions see a good return on their investments. I believe some of these decisions are being made for business reasons.”

The new programs are being designed with the hope of instilling the desire to go into the more underserved areas, but freedom of choice may override the brainwashing. “There is an idea that because there will be more dentists, they will go to where the care is needed,” said Dr. Denis E. Simon III, chair of the ADA Council on Dental Education and Licensure. “Dentists are still independent practitioners who have to go out and make a living. Even in my own state of Louisiana, new graduates tend to stay and practice in Baton Rouge, New Orleans or other more metropolitan areas rather than go to some of the areas of the state where there are fewer dentists.”

My advice to students that are interested in a dental profession is to plan early. Get started right away in a pre-dental program, and choose an undergraduate college that will be less competitive if grades might be a problem. You may need a 4.0 to get in, and to the dental school admissions board, an A from a small college is every bit as good as an A from a large university. Dentistry may be a difficult path, but the extra security because of the demand will make it worthwhile.

Dr. Moulton’s article was published in the Desert Valley Times, April 2009

The problem is more widespread than people realize. It affects about one third of the population in North America, to some degree. It usually occurs unnoticed and undiagnosed because of its gradual onset. In females it is seen a little more frequently, but in males it is usually more severe. The reason for these variations is that the cause is usually a combination of many different factors.

Basically, erosion of tooth structure is caused by acid. Once the enamel is lost, the softer dentin dissolves much faster. How could anyone get that much acid in their mouth? It’s done a little at a time through food. The acid level, or pH, of the mouth is close to neutral, but almost all foods are acidic to some extent. Ranging from least to most, you have proteins, like dairy, meat and nuts, then there are grains and vegetables, followed by whole fruit, dried fruit, sweetened foods, citrus fruits, fruit juices, whole lemons, sodas, energy drinks, and battery acid. I trust no one out there is drinking battery acid, but energy drinks are a close second. Men drink more energy drinks and sodas than women. That’s why their problems become more severe.

There are other sources of acid exposure to the teeth, however. Gastric reflux, indigestion, anorexia, bulimia, and medications are the common ones. Women have an edge in those categories, which would also explain why they are more frequently affected by erosion. In children, carrying baby bottles or sipper cups around between meals will constantly bathe their teeth in acid if there is anything in them besides water. Milk, juice, Kool-Aid, or heaven forbid, soda, can cause a devastating amount of decay in those poor little tykes.

Drugs that affect the degree of acidity in the mouth, such as methamphetamines, drastically increase the erosion and decay that occurs. Other drugs and diseases that decrease the amount of saliva will indirectly promote erosion. Lastly, one of the greatest causes of tooth erosion is brushing your teeth. I guess I should qualify that and say brushing them incorrectly.

To understand this, let’s consider the chemistry involved. The acids in your food dissolve the calcium on the surface of your enamel. However, it doesn’t strip it straight off; it creates little micro holes, leaving the remaining calcium porous, like a sponge, and weaker. Nature has accounted for this problem, and the saliva contains minerals to replace the ones that were lost, but that process takes about an hour. So if you brush your teeth right away, you may polish off that remaining softer surface layer of calcium.

There are other factors involved also. Hard bristles and abrasive toothpastes and mouthwashes can compound the problem. The amount of time the food adheres to the teeth affects the length of time the teeth are exposed to the acid. Thus, eating fruits and vegetables actually creates as much erosion as drinking sodas. The soda is gone in a flash, especially if you use a straw. It just goes straight down to do more major damage to your insides. But the healthy stuff sticks around longer in your mouth. Incidentally, that’s why vegetarians get more cavities than normal people. The increased exposure time, and the nutrition-rich environment is a great breading ground for the bacteria that cause decay.

However, it’s important for us to be able to eat healthy natural foods, so there are things that can be done to counteract this problem. Maybe we could take a tip from nature to come up with an effective approach. The saliva works in three ways to fight tooth erosion. It washes away the food, neutralizes the acid, and remineralizes the enamel. So if we rinse with water after we eat and floss with nonabrasive floss, such as Glide floss, that will remove the acid and food effectively. Then if you wait an hour for the remineralization process, brushing is just as important as it ever was, and safer. If you’re at work and can’t brush, it’s no big deal. Just be thorough in the evening. Use a soft bristled brush and a nonabrasive toothpaste that contains minerals, such as Sensodyne, Pelu, or Radiance by Neways. The popular brands are usually much too abrasive.

If you have decreased saliva flow, or dry mouth syndrome from illness or medications, carry a flask around (be sure it contains water only!) and swish and swallow every few minutes for that hour after eating. That’s especially important for you because of the increased risk of decay. Chewing gum during that period is beneficial for cleansing and stimulating the saliva. The best kind is Spry gum with xylitol, which is a natural sugar that prevents cavities.

There are other types of tooth surface loss besides erosion, such as abrasion and wear. The most common cause of wear, or attrition, is grinding your teeth, which we can discuss later. You might be interested to know that the most common source of abrasion, besides over brushing, is your dentist. When you get your teeth polished after cleaning, be sure to ask that they use very little polish at a very slow speed. Too much can be very abrasive.
Using the wrong kind of porcelain in a crown can cause a lot of damage to the teeth it contacts. The dentist must be careful also to avoid unnecessary grinding on tooth surfaces and maintaining full and correct contacts in fillings and crowns.

You can do your part in preserving your enamel, and we’ll try to do ours.

Dr. Moulton’s article was published in the Desert Valley Times, March 2009

All of a sudden, that same bright lawyer found himself as head of the US Public Health Service, conveniently being in a position to try a fluoride experiment on some unsuspecting Americans. Shortly afterward, Alcoa et al were given the green light to turn their biohazardous waste into profit. Another American success story.

In retrospect, we find that the results of this experiment were misinterpreted, if not downright cooked, and almost every study since then has either shown no difference in cavities between communities with fluoridated or unfluoridated water, or an actual increase in cavities in those with fluoridated water. Just this month, the ADA Journal contained research showing that filling materials containing fluoride did not reduce the occurrence of decay.

The reasons for this lack of confirmation of the claims of fluoride proponents are two fold. Firstly, 83% of the cavities in North America are the pit and fissure variety, which are not preventable by fluoride, but only by sealants which can be applied by your dentist. Secondly, we can’t lose sight of the fact that we’re not dealing with calcium fluoride, the naturally occurring kind which is at best a wash, but let me put this as emphatically as I can: the fluoride added to public drinking water is industrial grade hazardous waste captured in the air pollution-control scrubber systems of the phosphate fertilizer industry. It’s called silicofluoride, which is 85 times as toxic as calcium fluoride, yet it has no effect on decay. And as if that’s not enough, that waste doesn’t just contain silicofluoride, but toxic levels of lead, arsenic, cadmium, and even some radioactive isotopes!

Aside from the fact that adding a ‘medicinal’ substance to the public water supply is illegal, immoral, and unapproved by the FDA, let’s just look at some of the results of ingesting low doses of fluoride over time. According to Dr. Ludwik Gross, “Fluorine is an insidious poison, harmful, toxic, and cumulative in its effects.” Dean Burke, Ph.D., the former head of the National Cancer Institute cytochemistry section, revealed that, “fluorine causes more human cancer death, and causes it faster than any other chemical.” The Journal of the American Medical Association devoted two articles showing the link between fluorosis and the increase in hip fractures. The EPA scientists issued a statement in 1999 that silicofluoride is “a toxic and useless substance,” and called for “an immediate halt to the use of the nation’s drinking water reservoirs as disposal sites for the toxic waste of the phosphate fertilizer industry.” Even the ADA, the biggest proponent for fluoridation, advises parents not to give babies fluoridated water because it causes BRAIN DAMAGE.

I could go on, but let me give you a brief list supplied by Dr. Bill Douglass and Dr. Russel Blaylock, public health advocates. Fluoride causes immune system failure, musculo-skeletal damage, thyroid dysfunction, cancer, infertility, brain inflammation and damage, Down Syndrome, ADHD, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, psychosis, heart disease, and kidney disease just to name a few. Dr. Colen P. Harrison sums it up in a nutshell when he says, “it is a poison to all cells.”

Since fluoride is cumulative, it is never excreted. It just continues to build up in the body until you just become one big toxic waste dump yourself. Since there are so many sources of fluoride in our environment, you should avoid them in every form. Fluoride toothpastes, mouth rinses, pills, drinks, vitamins, and dental treatments are just as toxic to you as the silicofluoride, and just as useless. Have you read some of the labels on that stuff? On the toothpastes, it says that if you swallow any more than is necessary to brush your teeth, than call the poison control center immediately! Really, check it out. My kids would swallow everything from dog food to toy frogs, so I wasn’t about to feed them fluorine. Because it is cumulative, they probably would have swallowed gallons of it during their childhood. Find a nice fluoride-free brand at the health food store. Spry brand is a good one. It contains a natural sweetener called xylitol that actually helps prevent cavities, but the fact that they’re brushing is the real preventive factor.

I may be the first dentist you ever heard of recommending that you and your children stay away from fluoride. But my life is dedicated to programs for the dental care of the children of this community and even more importantly to the health of their bodies and minds. I know from research that their teeth are better off without fluoride, and the rest of their bodies are far better off.

That’s the real issue here. Are we treating teeth or people? Are we so engrossed in the albeit erroneous endeavor of taking care of the teeth with fluoride, that we’re poisoning the rest of the body? Are dentists HEALTH professionals, or are we just glorified mechanics? 98% of all the civilized countries in the world have banned water fluoridation. Almost all the evidence gathered against fluoride has been by physicians who have done their homework. Are the dentists of this country going to step up and make their own decisions based on facts, or are we too docile from fluoride poisoning to do anything but just go along with what we’ve been force-fed?

As a parent, at least you can do something on your own. Keep your children away from fluoride, get a good reverse osmosis water filter, and if they ever try to fluoridate our water, protest. If you would like a list of our references, please call our office. Thank you for your indulgence.

Dr. Moulton’s article was published in the Desert Valley Times, March 2009

We’re not talking gold, which has been around forever, just the tooth-colored materials and the latest developments, which we think are all that, but in ten years, who knows what we’ll have, unless the government tries to control dentistry, which would discourage any more innovation. Whew, check out that last sentence! I think my grammar teacher would have fainted.

Back in the 1930’s, they figured out how to bond porcelain over the gold and use silicate, or glass cement, to fill the front teeth. Those uses were very limited until after World War II, when they became much more prevalent. Incidentally, the use of plastics for fillings started after the war, and went into another direction. Many generations of improvements have produced the wonderful ceramic filling materials that we enjoy today. But let’s follow the evolution of the more aesthetic porcelain restorations that have attempted to recapture the natural beauty of our teeth.

The early porcelain-fused-to-gold (PFG) crowns were actually pretty nice, but they had two main problems. The porcelain fractured away from the gold frame, and they were super abrasive to the natural teeth. It was like chewing on sandpaper. In no time at all, the natural teeth opposite PFG crowns were worn down to the nerve. The only good solutions were to put PFG crowns on the opposing teeth, or make the biting surface out of gold, which defeated the purpose of using the porcelain.

Then came the porcelain-fused-to-non-precious metal (PFM) crowns. They are less expensive and because of the rigidity of the metal, there are fewer fractures in the porcelain, but they are just as abrasive, they look less natural, and many people are allergic to the metal, which is 62% nickel.

Until 1975, the idea of using porcelain without a metal substrate was unthinkable, because it would break immediately. It gets its strength from being bonded to something. But the advent of tooth bonding and laminated porcelain made it finally possible to make all-porcelain crowns. They were by no means a panacea, because there was still a lot of breakage and they were still too abrasive.

A series of refinements has produced more modern porcelain by using additives that make the traditional feldspar stronger and less abrasive. Ingredients such as Lucite and lithium disilicate have much smaller particle size, giving porcelains those superior qualities as well as a more translucent and natural appearance. These newer blends are categorized as “low fusing”, because they melt at a lower temperature. The old fashioned porcelain is still out there, so whether you get a porcelain-fused-to-metal or an all-porcelain crown or veneer, be sure to insist on a low fusing kind.

Is that all we’ve got? I thought you’d never ask. I saved the best one for last. The hottest thing out now is zirconia. It’s totally nonabrasive and unbreakable! Don’t make the mistake of using the brands that fuse porcelain over the zirconia, because the porcelain still breaks, but the homogenous porcelain-zirconia mixture is better, and pure zirconia is the absolute best. As I was placing one of those in a patient’s mouth, he asked me how durable it would be. I told him in all honesty that if a nuclear bomb went off across the street, all that would be left of him would be that crown.

Esthetically, zirconia is not very translucent, but on the back teeth, where you need the most strength, it looks perfectly natural. On the front teeth, which are not subject to as much stress, we like to use the more translucent types, which are more like your natural enamel, especially if you want to go for that extra bright white that’s so popular now.

Dr. Moulton’s article was published in the Desert Valley Times on
February 2, 2010.

Initially, we were told by Merck and Company, a leading manufacturer of bisphosphonate drugs, that there was less than a one thousandth of a percent chance of developing ONJ with the oral version, such as Boniva, Fosamax, and Actonel, and why shouldn’t we believe them? However, a recent study at the University of Southern California School of Dentistry has shown that if an extraction is done on a bisphosphonate user, the incidence of ONJ jumped up to about 4.5 percent, 4500 times greater. According to Dr. Parish Sedghizadeh, director of the USC research center, “we’re getting two or three new patients a week that have bisphosphonate-related ONJ and I know we’re not the only ones seeing it.”

In that previous article, I explained the mechanism by which bisphosphonates make you very susceptible to bone disease and cancer, but to put it simply, they kill your bones. This makes them harder and more resistant to fracture temporarily, but the slightest infection can turn them to mush (osteonecrosis). The jaws are particularly susceptible to this problem because of the teeth. If you are considering taking medication for osteoporosis, be sure your dental condition is excellent first, and well maintained, and if while you are on bisphosphonates, you need an extraction or root canal, or have a gum infection or denture sore, quit taking it immediately. They say the bone damage might be reversible, but I’ve seen very little evidence of that, and I’m afraid after a certain point it won’t be.

Also, oral bisphosphonates have been linked to esophageal cancer. Dr. Diane K. Wysowski of the FDA division of drug risk management has received 43 reports of this cancer being caused from the medication, 35% of which have been fatal. They have long been known to cause esophageal inflammation. That’s why you are told to remain upright for a half hour after taking them.

These are just studies concerning oral bisphosphonates. For intravenous ones, such as Reclast, just multiply these statistics by ten. My recommendation is to find a more natural way to treat osteoporosis. Try prevention.com for good ideas, and ADA information on the subject can be found on their website at www.ada.org.

Dr. Moulton’s article was published in the Desert Valley Times, February 2009

Unfortunately, that’s one campaign promise I’m afraid they will try to keep. So before we take our medicine, let’s consider what we could expect, by examining what the existing medical and dental insurance and government programs have done to those professions, and to the costs and quality of care borne by the participants.

Dental insurance became a significant factor in patient finances around 1970 in larger cities. At first, it was a considerable benefit, paying 80% of all charges up to about $2500 per year. If you take into account that costs are about ten times what they were in 1970, today that would be like having $25,000 in benefits every year. You couldn’t use it all if you tried! But even at that, there were complaints that dental insurance companies were making too much profit. They were collecting about twice as much in premiums as they were paying out in benefits. Consequently, the Insurance Commission made a rule that insurance companies could only keep 25% of the premiums for administrative costs. However, the CEO of the now defunct Pacific Union Dental Insurance Group confided in me that there were so many ways around that one, it wasn’t even funny.

So why can they collect many times more in premiums nowadays and be hard pressed to pay a meager average maximum benefit of about $1000 a year? To find the answer, just count the number of fingers in the pie.

The average dental office consists of a dentist, two assistants, and a receptionist. If a patient pays one hundred dollars, eighty of it goes to pay rent, equipment, supplies, labs, taxes, insurance, and payroll, and about twenty to the dentist. If a small insurance company is added into the mix, then part of that hundred dollars is used to pay premiums. The owner and employees of that insurance company are paid out of those premiums, with the remainder going toward actual dental benefits. The premiums from other insured members that don’t utilize their insurance that year can make up the deficit in benefits.

On a small scale, it works nicely, but as the insurance company grows and goes national, those premiums are quickly eaten up by more employees, big buildings, CEOs, VPs, executives, investor dividends, lawyers, consultants, advisors, company cars, company psychiatrists, data base management systems, stationary, postage, vacation pay, retirement pay, day care, office parties, waste, graft, fraud, lobbyists, taxes, and another list twice as long. There’s not enough left to pay decent benefits so they substitute double talk for benefits, and coerce hungry dentists into accepting less, causing service and quality to suffer, and one of the assistants to get fired!

So far we’ve been talking about administration woes associated with the implementation of large plans, but when you move from private dental and health care plans into government programs, there are other factors that make national health care an entirely different animal. With dental and medical insurance, do the employers pay your premiums out of the generosity of their hearts? Of course not. It comes out of your salary, which seems fair. You might think it would be the same with the government, but there’s one fatal flaw. A huge portion of the population isn’t paying their premiums. The working stiffs are footing the bill and the liberals are taking the credit, while villainizing those “rich” people in order to quell any pangs of conscience anyone may have about getting something for nothing. Well, the real joke on everyone is that that ‘something’ IS nothing!

Let’s use the example of the “charity” funds to illustrate. Those organizations solicit money from well-meaning people for this-and-that cause, but the recipients only end up with from 20% all the way down to 3%, depending on the size of the fund; the bigger ones keeping a higher percentage. Even though the government is vastly larger and more inefficient than any private enterprise would ever be, we will give those people who brought us the $4000 hammer and the $6000 toilet seat, the benefit of the doubt and say that 3% of the cost might trickle down to the facilities and personnel that are actually giving the medical care.

At that rate, for every million dollars used, about thirty thousand will actually go towards any kind of treatment; about the cost of a gall bladder and double hernia operation. In order to support even the worst of medical systems, (which is what it will be), economists have estimated a cost to taxpayers of about two trillion dollars a year; about one seventh of the gross national product, which is about 30 times what we currently spend on healthcare! To put that in perspective, in only five years it will have cost as much as every war in the history of this country! It will make every bailout and stimulus package we have ever done seem like a tip for your waitress. It’s like taking out a bigger credit card to pay for your last one, and you know where that leads.

That’s just the tab though. The real cost will be the downfall of our ability to access quality medical care. There will be no money left to provide it, no rapport between patient and doctor, no accountability by the providers, and no ability to find your own private practitioner. If you can get through all the red tape and beaurocracy of a system so complex it will make a dinosaur like Medicare look like a gazelle, and if you live long enough before you’re able to get an appointment, the person you will be assigned to will be some sort of tech rather than a doctor. The few doctors that are left will probably be reserved for the politicians when they realize what an abject failure this system will be, just like social security and the misappropriation charges right on the heels of the latest bailout. Instead of people coming to America for decent medical care, we will have to go somewhere else.

If you think this sounds a little extreme, I assure you I’ve been breaking it to you gently. At this point, we are pretty much at the mercy of this administration. All we can do is just not go quietly into that night.

Dr. Moulton’s article was published in the Desert Valley Times, January 2009

Only after those other considerations can we dwell on the cosmetics. However, it just so happens that the correct functional and hygienic alignment of the teeth is also aesthetically pleasing, so the cosmetic result just becomes a byproduct of the other corrections.

Once we have our priorities in order, we can decide on the methods. Traditionally, the thought of braces brings to mind a mouth overflowing with wires, brackets, and bands. When I was a teenager, it was kind of embarrassing to be a metal mouth with a tin grin, but today, some kids think it is a bit of a status symbol; just like in some countries it’s a sign of affluence to have a big gold tooth in the front of your mouth.

However, there are some serious drawbacks to all that hardware. It causes a tremendous hygiene challenge, can injure the gums and roots, cause decay and staining of the teeth, and although some kids think it is cool, others, and especially the adults, would rather not go through all of that. In some cases the brackets are necessary, but most of the time invisible braces are the best choice.

Invisalign has developed a system that effectively produces orthodontic corrections with minimum time, expense, and discomfort. It consists of a series of clear trays, or aligners, that fit over your teeth and gradually move them into the correct positions. They look great, they’re more comfortable, and they’re removable so you can eat, brush, and floss much more effectively. These are benefits that kids and adults alike can appreciate. One concern is that braces can throw your bite off, but the Invisalign trays are computer generated, so the finished bite is correct to within one hundredth of a millimeter.

Behind the scenes, the dentist must be trained and certified with Invisalign, and we work with one of their orthodontic specialists to collaborate on the best course of treatment. So if you’re thinking braces, your choice may be clear!

Dr. Moulton’s article was published in the Desert Valley Times, January 2009