Letter from America
Dentistry today - putting profit before patients
Health care in the United States, and I am úsure in
Europe and other developed úareas, is becoming an
increasingly competitive business. The once taboo practice of
physicians or dentists seeking publicity has become
commonplace. The pursuit of profit, rather than patient and
professional needs, is driving the creation of new
publications, and of new products. Thus is created, I
believe, a potential conflict between serving the
patient's best interests, and promotion of a product,
procedure, or individual for personal monetary gain.
Each month I receive many journals and they tend to be
grouped into four categories. The first is the traditional
peer-reviewed, rather eso-teric scientific journals that I
would guess few practising dentists read with any regularity.
The second category is the organizational journals that many
colleagues probably read frequently for clinical information,
such as the Journal of the American Dental Association, or,
in Norway, Tidende. The third and fourth categories are both
essentially publications whose primary goal is the selling of
advertisements and they are generally sent to all dentists,
and others in the industry who are interested, for no charge.
The fourth category that I call the tabloids, is clearly a
growth industry aimed at selling techniques and materials to
dentists, by selling advertisements for these products and
techniques to manufacturers.
The problem category, in my opinion, is the third group
that I call the magazines - the group that falls in between
the association journals, clearly scientific in most cases,
and the tabloids, which are entirely market driven. The
magazines blur the line between scientific articles and
advertisements by mixing peer-reviewed material, with
articles paid for, written for or by, and submitted by
companies, without disclosure that what the reader is seeing,
is, in actuality, nothing more than an advertisement
disguised as an article. Dentists need to develop a
sceptical, questioning attitude towards these new
publications and learn how to separate useful information
from marketing hype. The combination of advertisements and
articles is dangerous and clearly challenges the ethical
guidelines and restraints that are a part of the dental
industry, as well as of our society.
There is nothing wrong with advertising, nothing wrong
even with the dental tabloids per se. Similarly, there is
nothing wrong with publishing for profit. But since we are
dealing with a branch of health care, as professionals imbued
with public trust, we are obligated to adhere to a higher
level of trust and truthfulness than normally expected from a
tabloid. When profit and truth collide, the scientific
journals, many of which serve a small esoteric group and for
which profit is subordinate to truth, have no reason to
choose anything but the truth. On the other hand, the raison
d'ˆtre of the tabloids is first and foremost profit.
The tabloids will promote an unproven material or technique
if they are paid, in advertising or other ways, whether or
not it is in the best interest of the profession or the
patient. Again, there is nothing wrong with a promotional
article, let's just make sure it is disclosed as a
manufacturer-supported advertisement and not disguised by
mixing it in with peer-reviewed articles. Dentists would be
wise to once again pick up the scientific journals where
evidence rules, and treat the clinical information in the
tabloids for what it is, anecdote and opinions not supported
by evidence.
Recently in the United States, there has been a huge
increase in usage of testimonials by dentists appearing in
dental advertising for new materials - why is this? Could it
be there are no articles to quote, no data to refer to, no
reason to purchase the product other than the word of one or
more hired guns? It is disappointing that some manufacturers
feel that insulting the intelligence of dentists with
testimonials, rather than providing data, is the way to
higher profits.
Some manufacturers apparently see their only way to
profit, as to constantly put out new editions of materials,
or to create new categories of materials (ie compomers,
flowables, ®condensables¯, ceromers - all simply variants of
composites). Instead of waiting until they have the product
right, they rush to market to beat the competition and then
have to come out with version 2.0, and then 2.1, then 2.1
Super etc. A quick new version is a not-so-subtle way of
saying the original product failed to live up to
expectations. In this way, not only can the unscrupulous
marketers fool the gullibel customer (we, the dentists) and
disguise that the manufacturer is having trouble getting the
product right, they can also appear to be at the cutting edge
of technology with perpetually-new products. Incredible! One
company will soon launch its ninth adhesive in nine years!
These ®new generation¯ products should not be confused with
true improvements based on a successful product of many
years' duration. I am willing to bet that many of the
compomers, flowables and ®condensables¯ presently on the
market will not be around in their present form by the turn
of the century - an extraordinarily short market life.
The ethical limits of our profession are presently
under siege. It is a sad reflection on dentistry, when
monetary gain appears to be the all-encompassing goal of some
in the profession.
It's time once again to put the patient before
profit.