Neil J. Bernard, DDS
Is our profession really being served by the publication of such unsupported claims described by Dr. Dan Fischer as a "hypothetical chronology" for the 21st century? In his article in the January issue of Dental Economics, Dr. Fischer creates a fictional dentist, Dr. C.D. White, who discovers a wonderful new tooth-like product (composite), then he follows with a corny poem about the evils of dental amalgam. Dr. Fischer states, "We can`t let status quo or complacency dictate our science, our treatment, and our ethics." I would add that neither can fiction or poetry refute the scientific evidence that posterior composites -both direct and indirect - remain a problem in large restorations and cannot claim to provide anywhere near the longevity of amalgam.
I am sure Dr. Fischer enjoyed his self-gratifying foray into fiction and verse, but his claims of composites` properties are grossly overstated, as are his claims with reference to the negatives of dental amalgam. This is simply not supported by any scientific studies.
I would submit that such literary drivel be relegated to the supermarket tabloids. It is not worthy of publication in any serious periodical in this or any other century.