The problems with implants

[Tricky Dicky]

Well first you should not have any missing teeth. They are vital - incisors cut, canines and premolar tear and molars grind for digestion. The more you lose the less you can tackle real food. They are not weak and prone to decay - thats just the detal extraction industry's propaganda. Just practice dental hygene and find somethings tough to chew and tear - just like a dog or cat.
Well whats wrong with implants?
(1) Molar replacements just have the one screw but real molars have a number of roots you dont want a concentration of forces when you are grinding tough food. Solution a base plate held by three or more smaller screws ( pricey)
(2) The post - this is a push fit into hex head ( don't chew toffee. ) It's there to protect the head from damage when someone thumps you on the jaw ( don't get into fist fights it'll cost you ).However with a tight fit the force will be transmitted to the hex head and the damage done. Suggestions, leave the natural roots intact. No canal fillings or what remains of the tooth will disintegrate. Seal of the pulp with neutral material and treat the absess with tailoured anti-biotics
Now with both 1 and 2 build up a substitute tooth using specialized formers. Stages:
(a) A base layer optimized for adhesian between roots ( plate ) and next stage.
(b) The bulk of the tooth made up of a material optimized for resiliance. This can be ground to shape.
(c) Final stage a coating of a material optimized for hardness.
Of course this tooth will wear over time and of course it can be knocked out - but the beauty is that the process can be repeated.

[Mr. Mensch]

Are you a dentist?

[junie]

jack of all trades, master of none... :loco:






It's all been said before but here goes again.

A 'T' section gantry 'placed' near a thermal vent, height variable, one variable arm over/near vent, other arm in cool heat engine between output drives gen charges batteries ( obviously no room for discharge gasses )

Devices can then be directly charged by batteries or via a cable ( HF AC )

Sample device - movable accoustic newtonian telescope very very long Transducer at focus ouput very much ampified and then analized for patterns.

Scanned by rotation at CG either Cartesian or Polar. Purpose to monitor near surface for subs.

Range very far but can't detect 'string of pearls' type sub lurking in ocean trench.

Information sent up regularly by min sub or very fine neutral bouyancy cable







Well first you should not have any missing teeth.

They are vital - incisors cut, canines and premolar tear and molars grind for digestion.

The more you lose the less you can tackle real food.

They are not weak and prone to decay - thats just the detal extraction industry's propaganda.

Just practice dental hygene and find somethings tough to chew and tear - just like a dog or cat.


Well whats wrong with implants?

(1) Molar replacements just have the one screw but real molars have a number of roots you dont want a concentration of forces when you are grinding tough food.

Solution a base plate held by three or more smaller screws ( pricey)

(2) The post - this is a push fit into hex head ( don't chew toffee. )

It's there to protect the head from damage when someone thumps you on the jaw ( don't get into fist fights it'll cost you ).

However with a tight fit the force will be transmitted to the hex head and the damage done. Suggestions, leave the natural roots intact.

No canal fillings or what remains of the tooth will disintegrate.

Seal of the pulp with neutral material and treat the absess with tailoured anti-biotics

Now with both 1 and 2 build up a substitute tooth using specialized formers. Stages:

(a) A base layer optimized for adhesian between roots ( plate ) and next stage.

(b) The bulk of the tooth made up of a material optimized for resiliance. This can be ground to shape.

(c) Final stage a coating of a material optimized for hardness.

Of course this tooth will wear over time and of course it can be knocked out - but the beauty is that the process can be repeated.

[waltky]

Granny once tried to get a doctor to put a brain chip in Uncle Ferd to make him smarter...
http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif
Unapproved experimental implants used on humans
Tue, Oct 03, 2017 - Experimental implants that should only have been used in laboratory or animal tests were sent abroad and used on patients who were treated like human guinea pigs, an inquiry at one of Britain’s leading universities has found.


An artificial windpipe, an arterial graft and a synthetic tear duct manufactured by scientists at University College London (UCL) were used in operations, despite not being approved for use in humans, the inquiry’s report said. Stephen Wigmore, professor of transplantation surgery at the University of Edinburgh who chaired the inquiry, said the findings were “quite frightening” and that patients had been essentially used as “guinea pigs.” In one case, a 26-year-old man, a drug addict living in Tehran, was implanted with a graft to bypass the femoral artery, the report said.

This amounted to clinical negligence, an expert in vascular medicine told the inquiry. “In [the expert’s] opinion it was almost inevitable that that would result in the patient would lose their limb or their life,” Wigmore said. The outcome of the procedure was not established. Other documents suggested that plastic discs had been sent to Mumbai, India, where they were implanted under the skin of a patient in need of an ear reconstruction to test that the material was bio-compatible. The report did not find evidence to show that patients had come to harm as a direct result of these breaches, but it did not rule out the possibility either. Moreover, the findings are likely to cast a shadow over the university’s reputation for pioneering medical research. “It’s very serious and it’s quite frightening to think that someone could be manufacturing this kind of device without knowing the regulations that govern it,” Wigmore said.

The inquiry into regenerative medicine at UCL was triggered by concerns about the close ties between several scientists at UCL and disgraced surgeon Paolo Macchiarini, who was at the center of a major medical scandal at Sweden’s Karolinska Institute. The Italian doctor was initially feted as a medical superstar after he claimed to have successfully transplanted a synthetic windpipe, seeded with a patient’s own stem cells, to create a new, functioning organ. However, the remarkable success story began to unravel when it emerged that six of the eight patients to receive synthetic tracheas had died. The plastic scaffold used in the first operation, on a 36-year-old Eritrean man, was constructed by former UCL professor Alexander Seifalian, who was dismissed last year after a tribunal in an unrelated case found that he had dishonestly obtained ￡24,000 (US$31,944) from an overseas student.

Seifalian’s laboratory was not licensed to make clinical-grade devices, the inquiry found, and no permission had been sought from the health regulator to use an unlicensed device. Normally, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) only grants such approval in compassionate use cases or in a medically urgent situation where there are no suitable alternative treatments. There is no suggestion that the 2014 death of the patient, called Andemariam Beyene, was linked to failings by UCL scientists, but Wigmore said that due to the oversight UCL is now seeking advice about whether the university could be held legally liable. The inquiry also uncovered paperwork describing an operation in which a male 26-year-old drug addict was given an 18cm polymer graft, apparently prepared by Seifalian’s team. The implant was used to bypass the femoral artery, the body’s second-largest artery, because the vessel had become chronically infected and had an aneurysm, the report said.

MORE (http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2017/10/03/2003679643)