Links

I could devote many pages to the debates about fluoride, x-ray safety, filling materials, tooth bleaching, and so on.  I will be glad to discuss your concerns with you.  When you do your research, remember the Internet is rife with misinformation.  You would do best to seek the well regarded, scientific sites such as the ones below.  Here are some background articles.  

Click the statement for the entire article.

Amalgam (silver fillings) versus composite fillings:

Don't worry, amalgams are safe, less expensive, and work really well!  They are more durable than the alternative, composite resin (the tooth colored material) I present these many articles to counter those who say composites are superior to amalgam.  

November 2022 DENTAL ECONOMICS MAGAZINE article "Critique of dental procedures in 2022" states: "Why are composites still failing so soon?"

December 2021 DENTAL ECONOMICS MAGAZINE article "Improving composite restoration longevity" states:  "A range of studies show that traditional composites last between two and five years, versus amalgam, which typically lasts a decade or more. “Amalgam isn't pretty. It corrodes,” Flucke says. “Some folks have allergies. But say what you will about it, we didn’t see the frequency of recurrent caries that we do with composites."

February 2022 CRA article "Why Composite Restorations Fail" states : What has made the restorations degenerate to this level in just a fewyears?

October 2021 issue of "Clinical Research Associates" states:
"Amalgam serves more than double the amount of time reported for composite"

These instructions I received recently from Dana-Farber and Brigham Cancer Center in Boston for a mutual patient that had upcoming radiation treatment, stressed using amalgam over composite. I can only assume because they agree which restoration is more successfull

May 2020 Journal of the American Dental  Association , regarding amalgam fillngs says: "these fillings are very strong and can typically hold up without forming cracks when you chew. They also last longer than fillings made of other materials" 

When the time comes to remove composite fillings, it is a problem.  Amalgam is quick and definitive due to the easy visibility.  Composite is practically impossible to removal accurately, as stated in this December 2019 Journal of the American Dental Association: "removal of existing composite restorations without unnecessary removal of tooth structure is challenging"

"The New England Children’s Amalgam Trial found that children randomized to amalgam had better psychosocial outcomes than those assigned to composites for posterior tooth restorations. "  Pediatrics  article titled  Dental Composite Restorations and Psychosocial Function in Children

"Ultimately, dentists usually remove some tooth structure when removing direct composites because of the difficulty in distinguishing between the tooth-colored material and the natural tooth structure," INSIDE DENTISTRY August 2019

"Tooth colored fillings usually require a replacement every 5 to 7 years...because tooth decay has formed under them" Oklahoma University, DENTISTRY TODAY JUNE 2019

Clinical Research Associates August 2019 issue: " It is well known that longevity of posterior composite restorations lags far behind that of amalgam restorations."

American Dental Association's "Evidence Based Dentistry" article states: "The results of this review suggest that composite resin restorations in posterior teeth still have less longevity and a higher number of secondary caries when compared to amalgam"

Dental Economics July 2018: photo of composite filling reads: "composites often look excellent when initially placed, a few years of service frequently shows significant degeneration of margins and recurrent caries. "

Dental Economics July 2018 article about composite problems: "far more caries. . . than I have ever seen on amalgam"

Dentistry Today Magazine (JUNE 2018 issue) states: 

"direct composite restoration continues to be mentioned as a source of irritation and dissatisfaction. With frequent postoperative sensitivity, recurrent caries, the length of time these procedures take, and the challenges in creating ideal interproximal contacts, these restorations can indeed be a source of frustration."

Clinician's Report June 2018 titled  "The Epidemic of Cervical Caries in Class II Resin Box Forms" (meaning composite fillings get recurrent decay easily),  The article goes on at length with suggestions to minimize the problem with composites, and finally near the end states  regarding amalgam: "is less problematic during placement and can provide better long-term service. Multiple studies have shown amalgam is more anticariogenic than composite resin".

Dental Economics Magazine August 2017 : 
Considering the trend to replace amalgam with composites, and the failure rate of composite restorations being double to that of amalgam, the consequences could be detrimental to our patients.

Dental Economics Magazine April 2017 :  "The international research on large amalgam restorations shows about twice the longevity of composite"

Mayo Clinic: Amalgam is safe

California Dental Association handout on restorative materials.

Time Magazine on amalgam safety.pdf

Center for Disease Control (CDC) position that amalgam is safe and effective.

Fluoride:

Center for Disease Control (CDC) that water fluoridation is safe.

NY State Dental  fluoride fact sheet

X-rays:

Explains how minuscule is the amount of radiation from dental x-rays.

Powerpoint presentation on dental x-ray exposure.

Cracked tooth syndrome (this is becoming more and more common):

A good article from Colgate on cracked tooth syndrome.

The ADA's handout on the subject (PDF file).

You can e-mail Dr. Davison at