![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
healthy_back Ещё одна статья: https://karinbadt.medium.com/the-science-of-orthodontics-511e94795aa (https://disk.yandex.com/i/NgJc9lo5ou_zbQ)
Статью я выложу только ссылкой, сюда не буду (27 страниц). Но у меня ещё есть пассаж без ссылки, но явно её авторства. Вот он под катом на английском.
This is a moot argument because the orthodontic AAO Guidelines to Orthodontists specifically state that if TMD develops during or after the treatment it is to be considered a coincidence. They wrote these guidelines after the Brimm lawsuit of 1986, to make sure no orthodontist blows the whistle and starts noticing there is a causal relationship. They are trained to say it has nothing to do with each other. For example, my TMD was caused by condyles being too back. With some reversal treatments, my condyles came forward. I no longer have TMD. When I point that out to pro-extraction orthodontists, they say it is a coincidence that you had TMD after extraction orthodontics, and now that it has gone away because I reversed extraction orthodontics, it does not mean it is not a separate condition and will come back later. TMD is so vaguely defined that the orthodontists can basically have a field day with denying it has anything to do with occlusion, movement of teeth, or even jaws. One study surveyed about 80 Brazilian orthodontists and asked if they thought TMD could be caused by orthodontics. About 60% of them said yes (let me find the article): especially those who'd been practicing for a long time. The conclusion of the authors of this study was that they had to "re-educate" those orthodontists to know that it is just a coincidence, that "high quality" post-Brimm case studies have "proved no connection between jaw joint and orthodontic movement" and that these orthodontists who continue to think that orthodontic treatment can cause TMD are dangerous for the profession and need to be "re-educated" to know "the truth" that there is no such thing as TMD after orthodontics, or else their "false belief" will end up giving orthodontics a bad reputation. A reputation that it deserves. Let me find that article, it was fascinating, the Orwellian double-think. My figures might also be a bit off, as from memory. One thing you CAN prove with before and after xrays is if the condyle has distalized, which is a cause of TMD. Another thing to prove is that mandibular movements changed, but this is too late, because this is not something measured from a conebeam.
The research paper they probably presented was a 1992 study published in the AJO-DO. The 1992 journal has several publications that had been commissioned by the American Association of Orthodontists to protect themselves from lawsuits, after the 1.3 million dollar lawsuit from 19 year old Susan Brimm, who had severe TMD from extraction/retraction (PER). If you read these journal articles, they are absurd. They say that occlusion has nothing to do with the jaw joints hence no connection to TMD. TO combat them, you could collect articles on Bruxism and TMD which prove the correlation between....occlusion and TMD. There is also Witzig's 1960 article on TMD and premolar extractions. There is also the 2023 research article published in a high impact journal establishing that PER causes changes in mandibular kinematics and position and 'Is a risk for TMD." That is some ammunition for you. I have posted links to all these articles on the FB group Extraction Orthodontics Reversal, as well as hyperlinked some of these articles in my MEDIUM article on the Risks of Premolar Extractions. If your lawyer wants to speak to me, I can give him/her some tips of how to approach this industry. I had communication with the lawyer who won Susan Brimm in Michigan the 1.3 million dollars. (Poor woman, her sister tells me that 40 years later, she still suffers from severe jaw pain).
Here are the articles that were commissioned by the AAO to deny the findings of the Brimm Case: deliberately published so future patients like you cannot win a lawsuit against an orthodontist for TMD issues. The articles are in these links. The one shown by the defending lawyers in your case was probably by either Rinchuse, Giannely or Johnston (you can read them here in the links). Rinchuse's article is required reading on the Board Exams, so every orthodontics student gets the propaganda and now all orthodontists repeat like monkeys:" "High quality evidence have proven there is no link between orthodontic treatment and TMD." Your lawyer should be aware of this cover-up and what he or she is fighting against. They should also take a look at the AAO Guidelines to Orthodontics which lists risks with orthodontics that orthodontist at their own discretion can "choose" to disclose to patients. They have a very suspicious clause at the end of their list. "If your patient develops TMD during your treatment, this is to be considered a coincidence and due to pre-existing conditions." Like it is a coincidence if one dies at the same time that a truck runs over you. Your lawyer is fighting against something much bigger than he knows: the entire orthodontic specialty, and 60 years of trying to keep the TMD risk from coming out of the bag. Read my article on Medium which describes the TMD and PER relationship coverup.
There is also an 80 year old orthodontist who knows a lot about this cover-up--including seeing advertisements to orthodontists to write these articles--whose email I can share if interested.. I have personally helped 3 premolar extracted people get their treatment costs back from their orthodontist after TMD developed, by composing a letter for them. These orthodontists obliged the patients to sign a Release of Liability form in exchange for the treatment cost return. The lawyer in Michigan who won the case is Gittleman. He may be a good contact for your lawyer. Why not forward this entire message to him? 2 of my articles are on the list. I also have over 3000 responses to my survey on premolar extractions, and 45% of these report TMD. If your lawyer is in the US, he or she may want to consider escalating the case to a group action lawsuit. I can share with them the survey data and the verbatims.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3989577/
"This issue has been noted by many researchers in academic dental training centers worldwide. The results of many studies in this field have shown surprisingly high prevalence rates of TMJ injuries (50-63 %) after extracting mandibular teeth by dental students".
Статью я выложу только ссылкой, сюда не буду (27 страниц). Но у меня ещё есть пассаж без ссылки, но явно её авторства. Вот он под катом на английском.
This is a moot argument because the orthodontic AAO Guidelines to Orthodontists specifically state that if TMD develops during or after the treatment it is to be considered a coincidence. They wrote these guidelines after the Brimm lawsuit of 1986, to make sure no orthodontist blows the whistle and starts noticing there is a causal relationship. They are trained to say it has nothing to do with each other. For example, my TMD was caused by condyles being too back. With some reversal treatments, my condyles came forward. I no longer have TMD. When I point that out to pro-extraction orthodontists, they say it is a coincidence that you had TMD after extraction orthodontics, and now that it has gone away because I reversed extraction orthodontics, it does not mean it is not a separate condition and will come back later. TMD is so vaguely defined that the orthodontists can basically have a field day with denying it has anything to do with occlusion, movement of teeth, or even jaws. One study surveyed about 80 Brazilian orthodontists and asked if they thought TMD could be caused by orthodontics. About 60% of them said yes (let me find the article): especially those who'd been practicing for a long time. The conclusion of the authors of this study was that they had to "re-educate" those orthodontists to know that it is just a coincidence, that "high quality" post-Brimm case studies have "proved no connection between jaw joint and orthodontic movement" and that these orthodontists who continue to think that orthodontic treatment can cause TMD are dangerous for the profession and need to be "re-educated" to know "the truth" that there is no such thing as TMD after orthodontics, or else their "false belief" will end up giving orthodontics a bad reputation. A reputation that it deserves. Let me find that article, it was fascinating, the Orwellian double-think. My figures might also be a bit off, as from memory. One thing you CAN prove with before and after xrays is if the condyle has distalized, which is a cause of TMD. Another thing to prove is that mandibular movements changed, but this is too late, because this is not something measured from a conebeam.
The research paper they probably presented was a 1992 study published in the AJO-DO. The 1992 journal has several publications that had been commissioned by the American Association of Orthodontists to protect themselves from lawsuits, after the 1.3 million dollar lawsuit from 19 year old Susan Brimm, who had severe TMD from extraction/retraction (PER). If you read these journal articles, they are absurd. They say that occlusion has nothing to do with the jaw joints hence no connection to TMD. TO combat them, you could collect articles on Bruxism and TMD which prove the correlation between....occlusion and TMD. There is also Witzig's 1960 article on TMD and premolar extractions. There is also the 2023 research article published in a high impact journal establishing that PER causes changes in mandibular kinematics and position and 'Is a risk for TMD." That is some ammunition for you. I have posted links to all these articles on the FB group Extraction Orthodontics Reversal, as well as hyperlinked some of these articles in my MEDIUM article on the Risks of Premolar Extractions. If your lawyer wants to speak to me, I can give him/her some tips of how to approach this industry. I had communication with the lawyer who won Susan Brimm in Michigan the 1.3 million dollars. (Poor woman, her sister tells me that 40 years later, she still suffers from severe jaw pain).
Here are the articles that were commissioned by the AAO to deny the findings of the Brimm Case: deliberately published so future patients like you cannot win a lawsuit against an orthodontist for TMD issues. The articles are in these links. The one shown by the defending lawyers in your case was probably by either Rinchuse, Giannely or Johnston (you can read them here in the links). Rinchuse's article is required reading on the Board Exams, so every orthodontics student gets the propaganda and now all orthodontists repeat like monkeys:" "High quality evidence have proven there is no link between orthodontic treatment and TMD." Your lawyer should be aware of this cover-up and what he or she is fighting against. They should also take a look at the AAO Guidelines to Orthodontics which lists risks with orthodontics that orthodontist at their own discretion can "choose" to disclose to patients. They have a very suspicious clause at the end of their list. "If your patient develops TMD during your treatment, this is to be considered a coincidence and due to pre-existing conditions." Like it is a coincidence if one dies at the same time that a truck runs over you. Your lawyer is fighting against something much bigger than he knows: the entire orthodontic specialty, and 60 years of trying to keep the TMD risk from coming out of the bag. Read my article on Medium which describes the TMD and PER relationship coverup.
There is also an 80 year old orthodontist who knows a lot about this cover-up--including seeing advertisements to orthodontists to write these articles--whose email I can share if interested.. I have personally helped 3 premolar extracted people get their treatment costs back from their orthodontist after TMD developed, by composing a letter for them. These orthodontists obliged the patients to sign a Release of Liability form in exchange for the treatment cost return. The lawyer in Michigan who won the case is Gittleman. He may be a good contact for your lawyer. Why not forward this entire message to him? 2 of my articles are on the list. I also have over 3000 responses to my survey on premolar extractions, and 45% of these report TMD. If your lawyer is in the US, he or she may want to consider escalating the case to a group action lawsuit. I can share with them the survey data and the verbatims.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3989577/
"This issue has been noted by many researchers in academic dental training centers worldwide. The results of many studies in this field have shown surprisingly high prevalence rates of TMJ injuries (50-63 %) after extracting mandibular teeth by dental students".