I am pretty sure that they could have only obtained this from patient data. If the majority of Brit kids don't go to the dentist (which I assume is the case ;) ), then it won't be reported as such.
This should have been presented this as a percentage, not as raw numbers. Another reason for using percentage is because it would level out the effects of population skewing the data. More people, more cases of tooth decay... theoretically ;)
This graph is useless because preventive care and negligence can both show up as lower numbers.
An untreated cavity doesn't show on these statistics, while a filled cavity does. There's also the matter of how a cavity is treated; in the US we rarely get extractions when a filling will do, and we often get root canals. In the UK extractions are much more common. Getting a filling is obviously superior, but counts the same on that graph as just having a tooth pulled.
A tooth isn't going to rot out of your skull by the time you're twelve (unless you're soaking it in soda all day) and decay might not even be detected if you're not getting regular checkups, and many Brits don't.
Go British dentistry: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/07/world/europe/07teeth.html
Not to mention orthodontics. There's a reason the British are mocked so much for their horrible teeth; it's because they have horrible teeth.
One thing that is missing in the above (and I could be wrong on this, but am pretty sure I am not) is that dental care in the UK is not under the National Health Services. If you want to see a dentist, I think it is cash out of pocket.
Could be wrong. Not really in the mood to look it up though. Anyone more up to date?
"Could be wrong. Not really in the mood to look it up though. Anyone more up to date?"
Yeah. It's covered under the NHS, but most people aren't registered with a state dentist. Basically the incentives that dentists under the NHS face encourage really sub-par care in an assembly line sort of system, and they're still busy as anything giving halfassed dental care to far more patients than they could reasonably be expected to handle adequately.
There are private practitioners as well, but they're quite expensive. I think it's because the NHS system kills incentives for dentists to try to be more cost effective (can't compete with free, after all) so instead they target the richer demographic.
could be all the corn syrup in our diets. I don't think it reflects on our dental system, unlike Britain where people are tugging their teeth out with pliers.
I am pretty sure that they could have only obtained this from patient data. If the majority of Brit kids don't go to the dentist (which I assume is the case ;) ), then it won't be reported as such.
ReplyDeleteThis should have been presented this as a percentage, not as raw numbers. Another reason for using percentage is because it would level out the effects of population skewing the data. More people, more cases of tooth decay... theoretically ;)
Well, America does have those southern rednecks.
ReplyDeleteHow many black-toothed Brits weren't counted because there's no dentist in their county to make the survey?
ReplyDeleteI'm sure our kids consume more sugar.
ReplyDeleteThis graph is useless because preventive care and negligence can both show up as lower numbers.
ReplyDeleteAn untreated cavity doesn't show on these statistics, while a filled cavity does. There's also the matter of how a cavity is treated; in the US we rarely get extractions when a filling will do, and we often get root canals. In the UK extractions are much more common. Getting a filling is obviously superior, but counts the same on that graph as just having a tooth pulled.
A tooth isn't going to rot out of your skull by the time you're twelve (unless you're soaking it in soda all day) and decay might not even be detected if you're not getting regular checkups, and many Brits don't.
Go British dentistry: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/07/world/europe/07teeth.html
Not to mention orthodontics. There's a reason the British are mocked so much for their horrible teeth; it's because they have horrible teeth.
One thing that is missing in the above (and I could be wrong on this, but am pretty sure I am not) is that dental care in the UK is not under the National Health Services. If you want to see a dentist, I think it is cash out of pocket.
ReplyDeleteCould be wrong. Not really in the mood to look it up though. Anyone more up to date?
Of course, in Britain everybody is fine, nobody is ill, the NHS is great, hail to the NHS!
ReplyDeleteI thought the daily charts were the last good thing from The Communist but even there they are wrong more often than not.
"Could be wrong. Not really in the mood to look it up though. Anyone more up to date?"
ReplyDeleteYeah. It's covered under the NHS, but most people aren't registered with a state dentist. Basically the incentives that dentists under the NHS face encourage really sub-par care in an assembly line sort of system, and they're still busy as anything giving halfassed dental care to far more patients than they could reasonably be expected to handle adequately.
There are private practitioners as well, but they're quite expensive. I think it's because the NHS system kills incentives for dentists to try to be more cost effective (can't compete with free, after all) so instead they target the richer demographic.
could be all the corn syrup in our diets. I don't think it reflects on our dental system, unlike Britain where people are tugging their teeth out with pliers.
ReplyDelete