With modern X ray imaging devices I feel like the dangers of irradiation from dental imaging are probably quite low. If nuclear hormesis holds up, you may actually be better off getting the imaging done.

The problem is the same as the CT scan: as much as my health anxiety would love another set of CT scans to feel relieved about, even if they do find something potentially interesting it may be worse to act on it than to do nothing, while leaving other things that can't show up on imaging unnoticed, potentially diverting attention and giving you a false sense of security.

YouTuber and doctor Dr. Bernard "Chubbyemu" Hsu recently covered an upsetting example to demonstrate how doing additional routine scans wouldn't have helped and may have harmed in a specific sort of scenario that I'm sure many of us fear from time to time. It doesn't prove or even assert that such scans would be useless, only that they are far from a panacea and that it isn't settled science that we'd be better off with it.

https://youtu.be/YDYMMgyN4k0

And to me, I think that ties into how we're doing dentistry wrong: I think taking routine X rays for patients with healthy mouths, no history of issues and no symptoms is reckless. Maybe it is sometimes beneficial, but every single year as a requirement seems insane. Why not every 3? Are we really catching things early or are we drilling into teeth that are fine? I question it.

Of course, I'm just some chuckle fuck on the Internet with zero dentistry experience, but my knee-jerk is that something seems off here.

▲

cj an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> as much as my health anxiety would love another set of CT scans to feel relieved about, even if they do find something potentially interesting it may be worse to act on it than to do nothing

I personally have a preference for having the maximum amount of information available to make a decision.

“Don’t get that “unnecessary” test, it might give you a result that might lead to treatment you don’t need” — hearing this blows my mind every time.

▲

hibikir an hour ago | parent [-]

The treatment you don't need might be zero risk, but it might also have quite a bit of it. And some tests carry risks too: See how different countries have very different protocols. The US system, which is colonoscopy first, and where polypectomies will be done at the same time, can end up with bowel perforations when the polyp was not even cancer. So the diferente treatment protocol is not just about costs, but about balancing different risks.

The unnecessary test, leading to an unnecessary intervention, which gets you unnecessary long term issues is a real risk in many cases. It's not just a matter of doing a bonus blood test here or there.

▲

cj 30 minutes ago | parent [-]

To take it to the extreme:

If there were a risk free button that you could click to see a full breakdown of all illnesses no more how early stage, would you click the button?

It would include a report of cells that may eventually turn into cancer (or may not).

It would include things like polyps, and every other diagnosable condition.

Do you avoid pressing the button? Why?

	▲	jchw 25 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Unnecessary medical treatments can have serious consequences. Even if you are absolutely certain you have a given condition, some treatments are very not worth it. More importantly, any given scan misses tons of important potential health issues. Not just the fact that CT scans don't show signs of MS vs MRIs, but neither of them will tell you about many cardiovascular conditions. So time spent treating made up issues from CT scans you don't need may be better spent doing other regular exams instead. Meanwhile, many aggressive cancers will be far too fast for any reasonable scan interval to catch in time. (And CT scans, to my understanding, can miss tumors early on, since it can't see as fine of detail as MRIs.)

▲

Terr_ 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> If nuclear hormesis holds up

TIL of that theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis

▲

bawolff 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Hmm, googling it, it seems like a cross country flight is equal to 40 dental xrays. had no idea it was that low.

▲

warunsl 3 hours ago | parent [-]

There is a reason why Los Algodones has 1000 dentists for a city with population of 5000. It is called Molar City.

	▲	Terr_ 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Off topic: The idea of a City of Dentists seems like a Grim Fandango [0] kinda thing. Bonus points if somehow "cotton" (algodon) can be worked into the afterlife themes. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grim_Fandango