Dentist wants me to do a dental x-ray?

[Asimov]

A dental hygienist once said, after my protests of x-rays, "Oh, it's no more radiation than you get from a day in the sun."

Ray Peat commented that comparing X-ray to out door radiation is completely wrong.
He said that out door radiation passes through our body without causing any major damage.
It is not the case for X- Ray.

Totally. The vast majority of the ionizing radiation emitted by the sun is blocked by the Earth's magnetic field.

80+% of the radiation the average American is from two single sources; radon and medical imaging. If you live in a first world country, don't work in a mine, don't fly often, and don't agree to superfluous medical "images" you'll do everything possible to avoid your ioninzing radiation exposure.

 

[j.]

You mean don't fly often due to the radiation while being in the air, or to avoid the porn scanners?

 

[Dan W]

...didn't he say getting it done in the afternoon was better?

I think I also remember the suggestion about the afternoon being better.

With my dentist, I've noticed it doesn't raise an eyebrow if I just tell the hygienist that I "don't want an x-ray this time" rather than my initial approach of telling the dentist directly that I wanted to stop x-rays entirely. Of course, that may not help in your case, freal, where they're trying to troubleshoot a specific problem.

 

[Asimov]

You mean don't fly often due to the radiation while being in the air, or to avoid the porn scanners?

Yes to both. People in the flight profession (stewards and pilots) have in some cases been shown to get up to double the average yearly dose of ionizing radiation due to being further up in the atmosphere with less protection from the earth's magnetic field.

I'm sure the full body scanners don't help either. You can however, as a normal citizen, opt out of them. I do everytime.

 

[Swandattur]

I think ray Peat believes people get less radiation at higher altitudes. This quote is from his article about altitude and mortality. There are other articles where he talks more specifically about this.
"People who live at very high altitudes live significantly longer; they have a lower incidence of cancer (Weinberg, et al., 1987) and heart disease (Mortimer, et al., 1977), and other degenerative conditions, than people who live near sea level. As I have written earlier, I think the lower energy transfer from cosmic radiation is likely to be a factor in their longevity, but several kinds of evidence indicate that it is the lower oxygen pressure itself that makes the biggest contribution to their longevity."

 

[Swandattur]

From the Ray Peat Q&A: http://peatarian.com/4170/how-harmful-i ... -is-flying In the last answer Bruno shares a response about that from RP. There are links as to why.

 

[Asimov]

I think ray Peat believes people get less radiation at higher altitudes. This quote is from his article about altitude and mortality. There are other articles where he talks more specifically about this.
"People who live at very high altitudes live significantly longer; they have a lower incidence of cancer (Weinberg, et al., 1987) and heart disease (Mortimer, et al., 1977), and other degenerative conditions, than people who live near sea level. As I have written earlier, I think the lower energy transfer from cosmic radiation is likely to be a factor in their longevity, but several kinds of evidence indicate that it is the lower oxygen pressure itself that makes the biggest contribution to their longevity."

That's nice, but I don't think it's accurate.

hikers wear extra sunscreen on the top of mountains because they've all had horrific sunburn on mountain tops
female flight attendants have twice the risk of breast cancer and melanomas as the general population

If Peat could explain some plausible mechanism for these two similar but opposite actions that jived with the idea of reduced cosmic radiation at altitude, I'd be willing to listen. But Linear Energy Transfer hypothetically states the opposite of Peat's position (that ionizing radiation passing through particles and matter loses energy as it passes through the objects, getting weaker and weaker proportional the stopping power of the material through which is passed, ultimately to the point of being downgraded to non-ionizing radiation if it gives up enough energy).

I don't have any idea how Mesons are related to ionizing radiation at elevation, but I'd be willing to listen.

 

[kiran]

hikers wear extra sunscreen on the top of mountains because they've all had horrific sunburn on mountain tops

This is due to more due to UV, than any other radiation. Thinner layer of atmosphere means more UV means easier to sunburn.

female flight attendants have twice the risk of breast cancer and melanomas as the general population

Flight attendants do have altered sleep patterns though, and night shift work has been associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.

If Peat could explain some plausible mechanism for these two similar but opposite actions that jived with the idea of reduced cosmic radiation at altitude, I'd be willing to listen. But Linear Energy Transfer hypothetically states the opposite of Peat's position (that ionizing radiation passing through particles and matter loses energy as it passes through the objects, getting weaker and weaker proportional the stopping power of the material through which is passed, ultimately to the point of being downgraded to non-ionizing radiation if it gives up enough energy).

I don't have any idea how Mesons are related to ionizing radiation at elevation, but I'd be willing to listen.

I think he's referring to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_b ... ardization
High energy neutrons actually cause *less* damage than medium energy neutrons. So you might be better off with the radiation at altitude before it slows down into showers of more damaging particles. Not sure exactly about mesons.

 

[Peata]

There's high altitude and then there's *high altitude*. After a certain level, wouldn't it just get dangerous? Radiation poisoning, and all that.

Anyway, I've been able to hold off my dentists for a couple years between xrays. I had them done at my visit in the spring. I hadn't been there in 2 years or more before that visit. He won't be doing any at my appointment next month. I think my teeth are in good shape from using baking soda and magnesium oil.

 

[Swandattur]

Peata, you're RP quote in your light thread mentions red light as a help for ionizing radiation. viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2276&p=27221#p27221

 

[Peata]

Peata, you're RP quote in your light thread mentions red light as a help for ionizing radiation. viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2276&p=27221#p27221

Yes, and someone mentioned going under the light within an hour is especially beneficial after xray. I'll definitely keep that in mind for the future.

 

[jyb]

Some areas in my mouth (teeth or gums, not sure) are sensitive to hot/cold (I think that's pretty common - in my case my gum had receded a bit several years ago so I imagine some of the enamel is a bit sensitive), but also salt and sugar (white sugar mainly). Sugar and salt, if exposed to some areas, instantly cause pain. What is striking is that its really instantaneous. The pain goes away a few seconds after swallowing or rinsing. It's not a practical problem because those areas can be avoided, just like when drinking hot/cold water, but its something odd.

Do you think it is a sign of cavity, or more likely to be something to do with sensitive enamel in areas of receded gums? As a last resort, I'll go see a dentist who will probably do x-rays and check for cavities.

 

[4peatssake]

Some areas in my mouth (teeth or gums, not sure) are sensitive to hot/cold (I think that's pretty common - in my case my gum had receded a bit several years ago so I imagine some of the enamel is a bit sensitive), but also salt and sugar (white sugar mainly). Sugar and salt, if exposed to some areas, instantly cause pain. What is striking is that its really instantaneous. The pain goes away a few seconds after swallowing or rinsing. It's not a practical problem because those areas can be avoided, just like when drinking hot/cold water, but its something odd.

Do you think it is a sign of cavity, or more likely to be something to do with sensitive enamel in areas of receded gums? As a last resort, I'll go see a dentist who will probably do x-rays and check for cavities.

On Danny Roddy's "Ray Peat's Brain" page, RP mentions tooth sensitivity in connection with digestion issues.

It usually takes several days for the digestive system to adjust, with changes in the intestinal rhythm for example, and during that time things like headache and tooth sensitivity can increase. Increased calcium and fiber (raw carrots or boiled bamboo shoots, for example) can help.

He also said this about teeth.

I use baking soda, and I rinse my mouth after having sugar, orange juice, etc. The quality of the saliva, regulated mainly by the thyroid hormone, is the main factor in dental health.

My dental health has improved significantly since taking thyroid. Very little plaque build up and no sensitivity, including an area that had been giving me some trouble previously.

Peat also said that Abram Hoffer "accidently" discovered that niacin cured bleeding gums when he was using it to treat schizophrenia and senile dementia.

I have also found oil pulling with coconut oil to be extremely effective for oral health.

 

[4peatssake]

X-rays accelerate the rate of bone loss.

X-rays do their harm at any dose; there is no threshold at which the harm begins.

X-ray damage is not limited to the area being investigated. Deflected x-rays affect adjacent areas, and toxins produced by irradiated cells travel in the bloodstream, causing systemic effects. Dental x-rays cause thyroid cancer and eye cancer. Recent experiments have shown that low doses of radiation cause delayed death of brain cells. The action of x-rays produces tissue inflammation, and diseases as different as Alzheimer’s disease and heart disease result from prolonged inflammatory processes.

I have never known a physician who knew, or cared, what dose of radiation his patients were receiving. I have never known a patient who could get that information from their doctors.

The radiation exposure used to measure bone density may be higher (especially when the thigh and hip are x-rayed) than the exposure in dental x-rays, but dental x-rays are known to increase the incidence of cancer. Often, dentists have their receptionists do the x-rays, which probably doesn’t matter, since the dentist is usually no more concerned than the receptionist about understanding, and minimizing, the dose. Even radiological specialists seldom are interested in the doses they use diagnostically.

It was only after a multitude of dentists had a finger amputated that it became standard practice to ask the patient to hold the film, while the dentist stood safely back away from the rays.

Bone Density: First Do No Harm

 

[Mittir]

For regular dental cleaning they do not need to take X-rays.
You can talk to few dentists to find out what their requirement is.
Here is a quote from RP on teeth decay and estrogen

Teeth are very similar to bones, so it's interesting that treating male or female rats with estrogen increases their incidence of tooth decay, and removing their gonads was found to decrease the incidence (Muhler and Shafer, 1952). Supplementing them with thyroid hormone decreased the incidence of cavities in both males and females (Bixler, et al., 1957).

I used to have some sensitivity when i drank sugary food like coffee or honey+milk.
I still have problem with acidic food, i add calcium hydroxide to neutralize acid in OJ.
Since i started 2000 mg of calcium and weekly liver i have not noticed that problem.
If i skip liver for a week i notice sensitivity returning. I believe the vitamin K in
liver helps with dental problems. Calcium, Vitamin D and K works together
in lowering PTH. Since low PTH is good for bones it should be good for teeth too.

 

[Swandattur]

Here is an article on a kind of brain cancer incidence in people getting dental X-rays. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162- ... udy-finds/

I was thinking about showing this article plus the other one I posted to my dentist and hygenist if they get on my case about avoiding X-rays.

 

[freal]

Well, I went and did the dental x-ray. Well the doctor said if there a cavity between the teeth and its spreads then iam going to need a root canal.

somebody mentioned thyroid cancer and I really counted there is gonna be a thyroid collar. It turns out that the thyroid collar is not even used in Europe, nobody even cares about that in Europe it seems. I was kind of expecting they had it but it seems only the USA has laws about thyroid collar. I even had the classic x-ray with the film, not the digital one, thats 10x more radiation they fried me with.

I am kind of sick of arguing with people its seems nobody cares, it just leaves you stressed out. Its like figting with windmills.

 

[loess]

freal, that is infuriating, I'm sorry you had to endure that outdated x-ray technology, and without any protection against your thyroid! Sometimes all you can do is let go and accept that modern civilization constantly endlessly and relentlessly hurls toxic technologies at us, and you do your best to dodge the big ones. What you do most of the time can be a cumulative effect that is more healing in the long-run than an occasional infrequent and unavoidable stressor. It's hard to figure out where all of this stuff fits in when it comes to dental issues. Here's some food for thought on root canals from Danny Roddy: http://www.dannyroddy.com/main/2011/3/4 ... g-you.html

 

[Swandattur]

I managed to avoid the routine X-rays last time at the dentist, but at the last, the hygienist did give me this story about how getting X-rays was no more dangerous than sitting on a hill eating a banana, and that next time I should get the innocuous things. Until they get a better tool for looking for cavities, it's hard to get them to listen. After all, they aren't nuclear physicists, anyway, so they just go on what they hear from 'authorities.' The stress of worrying about it ahead of time was not good, either. I guess if they let themselves believe X-rays are bad, then what do they do with their expensive X-ray machines? Maybe, we need some enterprising person to design an ultrasound for dentistry. Then they could advertise their product as the safe way to do dentistry.

 

[Swandattur]

loess, that is an eye opening article. My husband has had many root canals over the years and they never held very long. This makes me wonder about the root canal I have, but if you have the tooth out, then the next option is some kind of bridge appliance in your mouth. I have read before that dental infections can really create health problems, but that article really spells it out. Ugh!