November 7th, 2009 admin
Dr Timmerman uses digital xrays during his diagnostic exams. These images can be seen VERY well on a computer screen and use up to 90% less radiation than conventional film. With the enhanced visualization, disease can be caught in earlier stages, and patients understanding increases as they do not need to strain their eyes and pretend to see what Dr Timmerman insists is present!
Digital x-rays are also good for the environment. No longer is there any chemical waste that was used in the processing of the films. If you want to see an office that does not pollute and uses less radiation, call 206-241-5533!
Tags: family dentist, general dentist, mercury free fillings
Posted in General Dentistry | No Comments »
October 25th, 2009 admin
Dr Timmerman has many patients that want to avoid mercury in any form. Why is that? Mercury is a neurotoxin, in any dose. The debate rages on regarding the safety in amalgam fillings, with many convinced that “acceptable levels” are not acceptable.
Regardless of the mercury content, mercury free alternatives are readily available. These alternatives are typically bonded in place, resulting in a stronger tooth and look better too.
If you don’t want mercury in YOUR mouth, or your KID’S mouth, call 206-241-5533 today!
Tags: cosmetic dentist, family dentist, general dentist, mercury free dentist, mercury free fillings, white fillings
Posted in General Dentistry | No Comments »
October 24th, 2009 admin
As time has gone on, people have developed allergies to metals. People with old fashioned crowns called PFM’s (porcelain fused to metal) that have been in service for many years suddenly have inflammed gum tissues. Replacing these restorations with metal free alternatives allows the tissues to return to normal, proving that the metal was a primary factor.
Mercury amalgam fillings in the past were the only choice when filling decayed cavities. With bonding technology developments, mercury amalgam fillings are no longer necesary, and composite resin fillings can be used.
Dr Timmerman replaces many mercury amalgam fillings but never places them. Some dentists offer both, but since Dr Timmerman would never place them in his daughter’s mouth, he feels that the same level of care should be given to his patients.
If you have metal restorations and would like an upgrade, or if you are facing treatment that includes metal restorations, call 206-241-5533 today to find out your options!
Tags: mercury free dentist, mercury free fillings, replace fillings, white fillings
Posted in cosmetic dentistry | 1 Comment »
October 21st, 2009 admin
In the past, mercury amalgam fillings were the only choice when filling decayed teeth. This level of technology was developed around the time of the Civil War, so it stands to reason that dental care has come a long way. Many dentists continue to use mercury amalgam exclusively when filling teeth.
Today, tooth colored composite fillings are a great alternative. Dr Timmerman has been placing composite fillings exclusively (never places mercury amalgam fillings) ever since graduating from dental school. Mercury amalgam is a material that he would never place in his daughters teeth, and offers the same level of care for his patients.
Modern composite fillings are not only better looking than mercury amalgams, but better for your teeth. Since they bond to the tooth, they support it (unlike amalgams, which often cause fractures to the teeth). The bond also prevents microleakage along the margins, meaning recurrent decay is not an issue, like it is with amalgam. The wear rate is similar to tooth structure, so composites mimic natural teeth better than amalgam does.
If you want to upgrade your amalgams, or need a filling and don’t want amalgam, call 206-241-5533 today!
Tags: cosmetic dentist, family dentist, general dentist, mercury free dentist, mercury free fillings, replace fillings, white fillings
Posted in General Dentistry | No Comments »
June 7th, 2008 Dr. Timmerman
The debate about the safety of mercury containing fillings has gone on for well over 100 years. I won’t try to change anyone’s mind, but I suggest a little homework to become familiar with the issues. Amalgam has many rules for use. Since it is created by mixing mercury with materials to create something that is 50% mercury, it must be handled correctly. The simple placement of amalgam produces scraps that are required to be collected and placed in a special container and then be removed by a “Haz-Mat” service. Offices are required to have waste water lines run through a filter system to trap scrap mercury, costing offices thousands of dollars. It is a material that is NOT offered in my office, as I believe the alternatives make the choice obvious.
Recently, the FDA has chosen to reclassify amalgams, and this may change current feelings and views within the industry. It is not a ban, at least not at this point, but it should help people better understand.
FDA revises its position on dental amalgams
6/5/2008
By: Kathy Kincade
The FDA this week settled a lawsuit that sought to have mercury fillings banned from the U.S. market. While not agreeing to a ban, the agency has agreed to add warnings regarding the use of amalgams in some patient groups, and to complete a review that could lead to more stringent regulation of the substance.
“Dental amalgams contain mercury, which may have neurotoxic effects on the nervous systems of developing children and fetuses,” the agency now states on its Web site. “Pregnant women and persons who may have a health condition that makes them more sensitive to mercury exposure, including individuals with existing high levels of mercury bioburden, should not avoid seeking dental care, but should discuss options with their health practitioner.”
As part of the settlement with Moms Against Mercury, Consumers for Dental Choice, and the other plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit against the FDA last December, the agency is now required to formally classify dental amalgam by July 2009, according to Peper Long, FDA spokesperson. In its 2002 proposed rule on dental amalgam, the agency proposed to classify it as a Category II device.
“Now that we are going to put this into a class, we will be able to put regulations in place that are more specific to dental amalgam,” she said.
The agency has struggled for years to reach a definitive conclusion about amalgam fillings. In 2004 an FDA panel determined that there was no evidence of risk from dental amalgam — even to pregnant women. But a 2006 committee disagreed. Even so, prior to the settlement of this lawsuit, the language on the FDA Web site regarding the safety of dental amalgams was less direct, noting only that “the possibility that dental amalgam could pose health risks that are not yet scientifically known.” In addition, regarding potential health risks of mercury for pregnant women, the Web site previously stated: “The recent advisory panel believed that there was not enough information to answer this question.”
In a letter posted June 3 on the Consumers for Dental Choice Web site, Charles G. Brown, an attorney for the consumer group, declared, “We have won our ten-year battle to get the Food and Drug Administration to comply with the law and set a date to classify mercury amalgam. The impact of the re-writing of its position on amalgam can hardly be understated.”
The ADA said in a formal statement issued June 4 that the FDA settlement with Moms Against Mercury “in no way changes the federal agency’s approach to or position on dental amalgam. The ’settlement’ only affirms that the FDA will do what it has intended doing all along. In the settlement, the FDA agrees to complete the classification process of dental amalgam by July 28, 2009. The ADA has supported the proposed reclassification since the agency first proposed it in 2002 and continues to support it.”
Currently, the FDA has different classifications for encapsulated amalgam and its component parts, dental mercury and amalgam alloy. “The ADA agrees with the pending proposal from the FDA to place encapsulated amalgam and its components under one classification. Based on extensive studies and scientific reviews of dental amalgam by government and independent organizations worldwide, the ADA believes that it remains a valuable, viable, and safe choice for dental patients,” the organization said in its statement.
In addition to Mothers Against Mercury, plaintiffs in the lawsuit included four nonprofit groups, two public officials, three dental professionals, and two consumer advocates that Brown refers to as “victims.”
Tags: mercury free dentist, mercury free fillings, replace fillings, white fillings
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
