Oral health and you

When was the last time you went to the dentist? Last month? Six months ago? A year? Why is a physician asking me when I last went to the dentist?

It turns out that having healthy teeth is important for more than just your smile. It’s good for your overall health, good for your new baby, and it just might save you money in the long run.

Did you know that patients with periodontal disease (unhealthy teeth and gums) are twice as likely to develop diabetes? And that poorly controlled diabetes is associated with worsening dental disease? Which, of course worsens your blood sugars, which worsens your gums… like a snowball rolling down a hill. Studies have shown that by having your periodontal disease treated by a dentist, you can improve your diabetic control by up to 20%!

Periodontal disease is also associated with heart attacks and strokes. A definite relationship between your teeth and gums and your cardiovascular system isn’t yet proven. We do know that dental disease causes chronic inflammation, and inflammation is implicated in both heart attacks and strokes. However, unlike with diabetes, treatment of periodontal disease has not yet been shown to reduce cardiovascular risk; studies are ongoing.

Maybe you don’t think you can see the dentist because you are pregnant. Only 1 out of 3 pregnant women visit the dentist during their pregnancy. You might not know this, but bacteria in your mouth cause most cavities. The main bacteria (strep mutans) that causes problems is transmitted from mother to child by pre-tasting food, kissing and other close contact. The more bacteria in mom’s mouth, the more likely the child will acquire the bacteria. Studies have shown that if you can delay the buildup of strep mutans until after your child is 2 years old, your child will have fewer cavities. Fathers and other family members can also pass on the bacteria, but that is less common. Also, most antibiotics used for dental diseases are appropriate to use during pregnancy. So are many of the numbing agents and pain medications used.

Cost is a concern for everybody. One of the reasons you may not have gone to the dentist is the expense. Maybe you don’t have dental insurance, or maybe you just don’t have the money to see the dentist. United Concordia (a large dental insurance group) published a study in June, 2014, that showed that patients who had their gum disease treated had significant annual medical cost savings, as much as $5,681 less. They also had up to 39% fewer hospitalizations.

There are other reasons besides cost that keep people from going to the dentist. Are you on blood thinners and are afraid that you will bleed too much from dental work? Routine cleanings, fillings and simple extractions can be performed without stopping your blood thinning medication. Just be sure you tell your dentist or dental hygienist that you are on the medication.

Besides keeping your teeth and gums clean and healthy, there are other reasons to get a regular check up. Many common medications can cause problems with your teeth and gums. Medications like prednisone can cause thrush, some seizure and blood pressure medications can cause gum abnormalities, and many medications can cause chronic dry mouth, which leads to cavities and gum disease. And your dentist is trained to recognize early signs of oral cancer.

As you can see, having regular dental checkups is important for several reasons. By working with your dentist and your doctor, you have the best chance of living a longer, healthier and happier life.

Changing jobs

Doctor: from the Latin word "docere", meaning teacher. After working in the specialty of Urgent Care medicine for a lucky number 13 years, a new opportunity dropped into my lap.

Four months ago, I just happened to notice that my former residency program, where I trained to be a Family Medicine specialist, was looking to add new faculty. So I sent the program director an email inquiry. I didn't hear back from him for 2 months, so I just assumed that they already filled the position.

Then, 2 months ago, I got a reply from the program director, Dr Gregg Mitchell, telling me that they were indeed looking for new attending physicians to teach the doctors. We met for lunch a couple of times and had a great time catching up with each other. Dr Mitchell was a resident at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Family Medicine department, when I did a 3 month rotation with them. He became faculty in the program during my last 6 months of training

After much thought, prayer and discussion with my wife, I decided to make a more formal inquiry. So I met with Dr Mitchell again, but this time he was accompanied by Dr David Maness, chairman of the Medical school Department of Family Medicine. After talking with Drs Mitchell and Maness, I told them I was very interested in the position.

Three weeks ago, I was offered the job. After a couple more weeks of thought and prayer, I accepted their offer. I will be an official Assistant Professor in the Department of Family Medicine for The University of Tennessee Health Science Center Department of Family Medicine, Jackson, Tennessee.

I will still have a few days of my own clinic every week, but my primary responsibility will be teaching newly graduated physicians how to become Family Docs. I'll give lectures; see, examine, and discuss treatment plans for patients with the residents. I'll also occasionally round at the hospital with the residents, teaching them how to manage everything from newborn baby exams, to managing acute myocardial infarctions (heart attacks, to administering comfort measures to patients dying in the Intensive Care Unit.

I always thought I would enjoy teaching at the college or post-graduate level. This will be exciting, intellectually stimulating and scary at the same time! A lot has changed in the 13 years since I admitted hospital patients.

I will deeply miss my current partners. They are the best group of physicians I've ever met, and are more like family than colleagues. Hopefully, before too long, my new colleagues will seem the same!

Obama vs Romney

It's almost time for the 21012 presidential election. What follows is an overall review of the candidates' position on several important issues facing our countries. These positions are taken from the candidates own public statements or positions. I hope it helps you make an informed decision on who to vote for this fall. This is from the website www.CatholicVote.org.

Obama on life:

Supports Roe v. Wade and affirms, “I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose.” (Source: White House Press Statement)

As part of his healthcare legislation, almost every health insurance plan will be required to cover sterilizations and contraception–including birth control pills that can cause abortions–with no co-pay. (Source: US Department Health & Human Services)

Overturned a law that prevented the government from giving aid to international family planning groups. Now our government can pay for people’s contraception (including abortifacients) overseas as well. (Source: White House Executive Order)

His campaign boasts that he “stood up to Republicans trying to roll back a woman’s right to choose and defund Planned Parenthood.” He praises Planned Parenthood and refuses to cut government funding ($487 million in 2012) for the organization. Planned Parenthood performs on average 900 abortions per day. (Source: Huffington Post)

In the Senate, he opposed a pro-life bill designed to prevent partial-birth abortions. (Source: IL General Assembly)

Ended a ban on using taxpayer money to fund embryonic stem cell research, which kills human embryos. (Source: White House Executive Order)

Eliminated conscience protections for medical workers who morally object to dispensing the morning-after pill (which is designed to destroy embryos). Recipients of federal money can now discriminate against these workers.(Source: Catholic News Agency)

Promises to veto legislation that would prevent taxpayer funding of abortion.(Source: LifeNews.com)

Obama is endorsed by pro-choice groups NARAL and Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood spent $1.4 million on an ad campaign for Obama. (Source: Planned Parenthood)

Romney on life:

Believes abortions should be limited to only cases of rape or incest or to save the mother’s life. (Source: CBS News)

Supports overturning Roe v. Wade and promises to appoint Supreme Court Justices who are committed to fair interpretation of the Constitution (Source: Life News) Supports the Hyde Amendment, which bars using federal tax revenue to pay for abortions (Source: Mitt Romney)

Promises to support efforts to eliminate federal funding for Planned Parenthood (Source: Huffington Post)

Promises to support the Mexico City Policy, which will bar NGOs that receive federal funding from promoting or performing abortions as a method of family planning in other countries. (Source: Mitt Romney)

Promises to advocate for and support legislation that will make it illegal to destroy unborn children who are developmentally capable of feeling pain (Source: Life News) He says, “If I have the opportunity to serve as our nation’s next president, I commit to doing everything in my power to cultivate, promote, and support a culture of life in America.” (Source: Mitt Romney)

As governor of Massachusetts, he vetoed a bill that would have allowed girls of any age to obtain emergency contraceptive pills (which are designed to destroy embryos) without parental consent (Source: Mitt Romney)

As governor of Massachusetts, he opposed legislation that would allow the creation of human embryos for the purpose of stem cell research, which would result directly in the destruction of those embryos (Source: Romney at NRLC)

Obama on marriage:

Supports homosexual “marriage” (Source: CNN Politics)

Believes the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) should be repealed (Source: The Atlantic – Wire)

Decided with the Justice Department that they would not defend DOMA in new cases (Source: Dept. of Justice – Press Release 2/23/11)

Extended to same-sex partners of federal employees many of the benefits that spouses of federal employees enjoy and supports legislation that would grant same-sex partners of federal employees exactly the same benefits as spouses (Source: Politico & OPM Rule) Required any hospital receiving federal funds to allow visitation rights for same-sex partners (Source: Washington Post)

Supports the Respect for Marriage Act, which requires all states to recognize same-sex “marriages” performed in other states, which would effectively make homosexual “marriage” legal–even as he emphasizes his belief that the question of same-sex “marriage” should be decided by individual states. (Source: Whitehouse.gov – Blog & “Respect Marriage Act”)

Romney on marriage:

Romney’s campaign page says, “Marriage is more than a personally rewarding social custom. It is also critical for the well-being of a civilization. That is why it is so important to preserve traditional marriage – the joining together of one man and one woman.” (Source: MittRomney.com)

Opposes civil unions that resemble marriage (Source: USA Today)

Favors some domestic partnership benefits but believes that states should decide which of these benefits are appropriate. (Source: Real Clear Politics – with Video) Promises to appoint an Attorney General who will defend DOMA (Source: MittRomney.com)

Promises to champion a new amendment to the Constitution that will define marriage as a union of one man and one woman. (Source: National Review Online & MittRomney.com)

Obama on religious liberty:

Obama’s Affordable Care Act will require most employers to purchase insurance that covers abortions, sterilizations, and contraception with no co-pay, even though many of those employers–including Catholic schools, hospitals, and dioceses as well as individual business owners and people of many different faiths–object to paying for such insurance plans on religious grounds. (Source: The Weekly Standard)

Obama’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claimed the power to compel a church to rehire a former employee to a teaching position. The case (Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church v. EEOC) went to the Supreme Court, which ruled unanimously in favor of the church. The decision reads, “authority to select and control who will minister to the faithful is the church’s alone.” (Source: Wall Street Journal Online)

Obama’s HHS would not renew funding to the Migration and Refugee Services (MRS), which provides services to refugees, migrating children, and human trafficking victims, because MRS, a Catholic organization, refused to provide or refer for abortions or contraception. (Source: National Catholic Register)

Romney on religious liberty

Romney writes, “If I am elected President, on day one of my administration I will issue an executive order directing my Secretary of Health and Human Services to issue a waiver from its requirements to all 50 states.” This would allow states to not force employers to purchase insurance that fully covers abortions, contraception, and sterilization, limiting the effects of Obama’s healthcare legislation while he works to repeal it entirely. (Source: Washington Examiner – OpEd)

Supported the Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC decision that affirmed the right of churches to make their own hiring decisions. (Source: ABC News)

Defended the right of Catholic Charities of Boston to decide on its own whether it would allow same-sex couples to adopt children in its care. (Source: Fox News)

Obama on fiscal responsibility:

Added more to the national debt than the previous 43 presidents combined (Source: CNS News)

Almost doubled the national debt over his term as President (Source: CBS News)

Added $1 trillion to the deficit each year as President (Source: Real Clear Politics)

Spent 25% of GDP, the highest spending-to-GDP ratio since World War II (Source: Forbes)

Romney on fiscal responsibility:

Romney’s goal is to reduce federal spending to 20% of GDP by the end of his first term (Source: Mitt Romney)

Promises to send a bill to Congress that will cut non-security discretionary spending by 5% (Source: Mitt Romney)

Promises to repeal the Affordable Care Act, privatize Amtrak, reduce subsidies to organizations that have access to other funding sources or that offer duplicate services, eliminate federal funding of groups that perform abortions, and reduce foreign aid for a total projected savings of $97.6 billion. (Source: Townhall)

Wants to cap Medicaid spending and allow it to grow at the inflation rate + 1% per year (Source: Economist)

Plans to reliquish more power to the states, resulting in federal savings (Source: Mitt Romney)

Plans to work to repeal the the Davis-Bacon Act, which requires the government to pay its employees above-market wages (Source: Mitt Romney)

As governor of Massachusetts, Romney closed a $3 billion budget gap without raising taxes and left $2 billion in a rainy-day fund (Source: Mitt Romney)

Obama on education:

Increased federal funding for scholarships and financial aid (Source: Whitehouse.gov) Spent $100 billion of the $831 billion stimulus on education-related issues, including teacher salaries (Source: Eductopia.org)

Issued waivers from the No Child Left Behind Act to 26 states after Congress would not repeal the law, freeing the states from the obligation to ensure that students are proficient in math and reading by 2014 (Source: NY Times)

Implemented Race to the Top, a program that rewards schools with money for conforming to a set of federal standards (Source: Wall Street Journal Online)

Refused to continue funding the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program, which grants public-school students in DC vouchers for private-school tuition (Source: National Review)

Romney on education:

In the third year of his term as governor, Massachusetts 4th graders and 8th graders ranked first in the nation in math and reading (Source: Taunton Daily Gazette)

As governor, he vetoed a bill that would have put a moratorium on adding charter schools in the state. (Source: MittRomney.com)

Created the “John and Abigail Adams Scholarship” to reward high-performing high school students with college scholarships to any state institution. (Source: MittRomney.com)

Supports empowering states to determine education policy, rewarding teachers based on student achievement, and school choice for students (Source: NY Times)

Obama on health care:

Raised taxes by $500 billion to pay for the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which the CBO estimates will cost $1.5 trillion over the next decade. (Source: Congressional Budget Office)

The ACA compels insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions. (Source: New York Times)

The ACA, along with the HHS mandate, requires most employers to purchase insurance that covers abortions, sterilizations, and contraception with no co-pay, even though many of those employers–including Catholic schools, hospitals, and dioceses as well as individual business owners and people of many different faiths–object to paying for such insurance plans on moral grounds. (Source: USCCB)

The ACA requires every individual to purchase health insurance, whether or not they need or want it. (Source: The Huffington Post)

The ACA makes it illegal for a health insurance company to spend more than an arbitrary amount on employee salaries, administrative costs, and marketing. (Source: PennLive.com)

Romney on health care:

Promises to repeal the Affordable Care Act as soon as possible, beginning with the stopgap of offering waivers to all 50 states while he works on reversing the law entirely. (Source: Mitt Romney)

Envisions the federal government’s primary role in health care as creating a level playing field for competition with the goal of driving down premiums. (Source: Mitt Romney)

Plans to cap the amount that a person can win in court for suing a doctor. (Source: Christian Science Monitor)

Promises to prevent discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions who maintain continuous coverage. (Source: Mitt Romney)

Will end tax disincentives that make it relatively more expensive for individuals to purchase health insurance apart from their employers, increasing real consumer choice. (Source: New York Times)

Will allow individuals to purchase health insurance across state lines, increasing competition. (Source: National Public Radio)

Is Health Care a Right?

Here's the conundrum for people who view health care as a right, especially if they support the idea of government controlled "universal health care". A "right" is something to which a person is entitled to just because they exist. It is nothing they can earn. It applies to all people equally, no matter their color, religion, sex, age, economic status or number of extremities. It is nothing that can lawfully be taken away.

The only way you can have universal health care is for the government to provide it. However, the only way a governmental system can regulate health care is to enact limits on access. This leads to rationing of services. If health care is my "right", then the government can NOT limit my access to health care. Just like they can not infringe on my right to life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness.

Can you say Catch-22? More to come...

Single Payer Healthcare is the bomb...

Check out this true story about the wonderful Canadian health care system. I realize that this is just ONE story. But, if this was you or your beloved family member, one is all it would take.

The wonderful British Health Service

Whenever liberals talk about health care reform, they almost always talk about 2 Utopian societies: Canada and Great Britain.

Well, apparently the British Health Service has decided that a 108 year old woman deserves a new hearing aid. BUT, she has to wait 18 months before she will qualify for it. I guess in the grand scheme of things, 18 months is nothing for a woman who has lived thru 1296+ months!!!!!

This really sounds like something to which we as Americans should aspire.

As reported in The Guardian, July 30th, 2007.

Slippery Slope

We are travelling down a very dangerous road with a very slippery slope, now, when it comes to the very ideas on which this country was founded. One of the things that separates this country from the rest of the world is our security in the notion that we cannot be forced to do something we find to be against our conscience. I remember a saying I heard growing up, "this is a free country, ain't it?".

That may be changing. There is a growing trend in this country to force people to do certain things "for the public good." The latest controversy involves the medical use of estrogen and progesterone. The "morning after" pills in question are high dose hormone pills that keep a fertilized egg from attaching to the wall of the uterus. If this newly fertilized egg( called a blastocyst) cannot attach to the wall of the uterus, it will not be able to further divide and ultimately become a viable pregnancy.

Many people, rightly or wrongly, find this to be tantamount to abortion. In Washington state, a law was passed to FORCE pharmacists to dispense this medication to women, regardless of their personal moral beliefs.

Those who wish to force the issue are concerned that, if pharmacists can refuse to deal with "morning after" pills, what's to stop them from refusing other medication, like birth control in general or Viagra to single men?

This is the slippery slope I'm concerned about. Personally, I believe that an independent,private individual MUST have the right to refuse to perform an action they hold to be morally objectionable. If he (or she) can be forced to do this one, small thing, I'm afraid the government will snowball this. What else can the government force us to do, in the name of the "public good?"

In my state of Tennessee, they passed a law making it illegal to smoke in public buildings. On the surface of it, I love this law. I hate the smell of cigarette smoke. I've heard people say on the radio here that that's as far as the ban can possibly go. "They" could never come into our homes to ban smoking. Well, in California, it's now illegal in many places to smoke in your own apartment. In New Jersey, they are proposing making it illegal to smoke in your car. Again, I like the concept of this law, especially when it comes to small children.

But where will these laws end? What else will the bureaucrats in Washington, or Nashville, or Sacramento, or Trenton, be able to make us do???????

Universal Health Care Scam

Whenever I hear people talking about “Universal Health Care (UHC)”, my skin begins to crawl. The repeated canard that the American system is far inferior to the socialist systems of the UK or Canada just falls flat on its face when faced with the facts. UHC doesn’t lead to access to the doctor, it just leads to access to waiting lists.

According to CBSnews.com on March 20th, 2005, in Canada, it takes about 3 months to get an electrocardiogram (commonly known as an EKG). Three months. For a test that takes FIVE MINUTES to perform, and even quicker to be interpreted. It takes 3 years to have surgery to correct torn knee ligaments.

In an effort to try to improve waiting times, the Canadian government has come up with some “guidelines” for acceptable waits. To get your knee replaced, you should only have to wait 26 weeks. And if you need cardiac bypass surgery, the most you should wait is, again, only 26 weeks. And these are the government supported wait times. A US citizen would sue their doctor and everyone else in the room if they were told they had to wait 26 days for bypass.

Another common myth about socialized medicine is that it is free. In the same article by CBSNews.com, it is revealed that Canadians pay 48% income tax. That means that if you make $40,000.00 a year, you have to pay $19,200.00 in taxes. Thus you only actually get to have $20,800.00 to pay for EVERYTHING you want to buy, including your mortgage. I don’t think people fully comprehend this fact.

Yet another myth is that Emergency Room visits would be decreased if only the USA had universal health care. It is assumed by the media that being uninsured increases the usage of ERs. However, according to the Canadian Institute for Health Information, one out of five people in Ontario went to the ER at least once within a twelve month period. That’s 20 percent. And, nearly half of all infants (48%) were seen in the ER during 2003-2004. Of this multitude of visits, over half were for NON-EMERGENT conditions like chronic back pain and sore throats.

Another blow to socialized medicine...

While our presidential candidates are all coming up with ways to socialize medicine here in the USA, the "great" Canadian system is showing us why socialized medicine doesn't work. A liberal Canadian politician, Belinda Stronach, had to come to the United States for surgery to treat her breast cancer. I'm thrilled that this lady was able to get the best treatment available. But if the Canadian system is sooo good, why would she need to travel here?