Nevada Orders Closure of Health Food Stores, While Liquor Stores Remain Open


You can’t make this stuff up. Nevada governor says health food stores are not essential, but liquor stores are.

It may sound like something out of the Twilight Zone, but it’s real:

The Governor of Nevada has ordered small health food stores (excluding Amazon-owned Whole Foods) to close, calling them “non-essential businesses,” according to a press release by the Natural Products Association.

Meanwhile, liquor stores are still up and running. No joke.

“Governor Sisolak’s decision is shortsighted and inconsistent with the federal government and other states and amounts to an assault on small businesses,” writes CEO of the NPA Daniel Fabricant.

“Amidst the recent COVID-19 outbreak, we’ve seen firsthand the importance of supporting a healthy immune system. Proper nutrition is a cornerstone of a ‘health-first’ strategy and essential vitamins and minerals, like Vitamin C, are highly efficient ways to support your daily health and wellness…Don’t let Governor Sisolak and his accomplices take away health choices away from your family.”

A health food store called Stay Healthy of Las Vegas shared on its website that the store was forced to close as of April 7.

Due to a Mandate issued by Governor Sisolak we are considered NON-Essential, contrary to Federal Guidelines, and had to temporarily CLOSE our doors. We need your help! Please call Governor Sisolak at (775) 684-5670 or to State of Nevada Homepage to at least allow Curbside Pick Up for us.”

Please click here to sign the Natural Products Association’s petition to the governor to let these essential businesses open back up.

The post Nevada Orders Closure of Health Food Stores, While Liquor Stores Remain Open appeared first on Return to Now.

This content was originally published here.

Posted in Health | Comments closed

No, The Health Department Did Not Say To Microwave Face Masks To Sterilize Them

DISCLAIMER: This post may contain affiliate links.

Surely you are in our super cool Facebook group by now, right? If not click here to join!

Y’all…please do not microwave your face masks. I guess somewhere on the internet there was a post telling people to do this. No. Do not do this!

There are people that are showing images of their burnt masks because they followed this advice that someone gave on the internet.

Health Departments are speaking up and asking you to not do this.

Fabric/home made masks are to be marked as to which side you will wear as inside to be consistent. These masks are to be…

Posted by

You wash your face mask. If you microwave it you will burn it. You could even catch your house on fire!

DO NOT TRY TO STERILIZE FABRIC MASK IN THE MICROWAVE as directed on facebook. This is what happened to mine this morning.This was at 2 minutes in an unsealed Ziploc bag.

Posted by

You can wash your face masks in your clothes washing machine. Mine has a sanitizing setting, so that is what I would use. But even if you don’t have that setting you can still do a hot water wash with laundry soap.

People are saying you can sterilize a face mask by placing it in a plastic baggy and microwaving it for 2 to 3 minutes. NO!

Do not put your face mask in the microwave to sanitize it , my house stinks bad ! My favorite mask to . Bummer

Posted by

Thankfully, those that tried it are speaking up so that others do not make the same mistake. Masks are hard to get, even if you are making your own, you don’t want to ruin it.

Do Not put cloth face mask in microwave!! This is mine on 1 1/2 minutes!!!!!

Posted by

I did a very quick search and came across many posts with the same results. Burnt, ruined face masks.

Don’t microwave the mask

Posted by

So do yourself a favor and skip the microwave. Just wash them in the washing machine or you can even hand wash them if needed. Give them a good soak and scrub, rinse and hang them to dry.

This content was originally published here.

Posted in Health | Comments closed

Sen. Joe Manchin erupts into shouting match with McConnell: You’re ‘more concerned about the health of Wall Street’ – Alternet.org

Sen. Joe Manchin erupts into shouting match with McConnell: You’re ‘more concerned about the health of Wall Street’

by David Edwards

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) called out Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) on Monday for being more concerned with propping up the economy than providing supplies to hospitals fighting the novel coronavirus.

“You can throw all the money at Wall Street you want to,” Manchin said after McConnell blamed Democrats for a stalled stimulus bill. “People are afraid to leave their homes. They’re afraid of the health care. I’ve got workers who don’t have masks. I’ve got health care workers who don’t have gowns.”

“And it looks like we’re worried more about the economy than we are the health care and the wellbeing of the people of America,” the West Virginia senator complained.

McConnell interrupted: “The American people are waiting for us to act today! We don’t have time for this! We don’t have time for it!”

“Let me ask you a question,” Manchin implored.

“Answer my question!” McConnell demanded. “In what way would the Democratic Party be disadvantaged?”

“Thirty hours [of debate] or 30 days, as long as you have the votes, 51 votes rule,” Manchin said. “So the final vote is going to be on passage, whether you have to negotiate or not with us.”

“Here’s the way it works!” McConnell exclaimed. “We have been fiddling around as the senator from Maine pointed out for 24 hours…”

At that point, Manchin reclaimed his time, silencing McConnell.

“We just have a little different opinion about this,” Manchin said. “You can’t throw enough money to fix this if you can’t fix the health care.”

“My health care workers need to be protected,” he added. “But it seems like we’re talking about everything else about the economy versus the health care. That doesn’t make any sense to me whatsoever.”

“It seems like we’re more concerned about the health care of Wall Street,” Manchin remarked. “That’s the problem that I’ve had on this.”

Watch the video below from

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. AlterNet’s journalists work tirelessly to counter the traditional corporate media narrative. We’re here seven days a week, 365 days a year. And we’re proud to say that we’ve been bringing you the real, unfiltered news for 20 years—longer than any other progressive news site on the Internet.

It’s through the generosity of our supporters that we’re able to share with you all the underreported news you need to know. Independent journalism is increasingly imperiled; ads alone can’t pay our bills. AlterNet counts on readers like you to support our coverage. Did you enjoy content from David Cay Johnston, Common Dreams, Raw Story and Robert Reich? Opinion from Salon and Jim Hightower? Analysis by The Conversation? Then join the hundreds of readers who have supported AlterNet this year.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure AlterNet remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to AlterNet, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

This content was originally published here.

Posted in Health | Comments closed

Keeping the Coronavirus from Infecting Health-Care Workers | The New Yorker

The message is getting out: #StayHome. In this early phase of the coronavirus pandemic, with undetected cases accelerating transmission even as testing ramps up, that is critical. But there are many people whom the country needs to keep going into work—grocery cashiers, first responders, factory workers for critical businesses. Most obviously, we need health-care workers to care for the sick, even though their jobs carry the greatest risk of exposure. How do we keep them seeing patients rather than becoming patients?

In the index outbreak in Wuhan, thirteen hundred health-care workers became infected; their likelihood of infection was more than three times as high as the general population. When they went back home to their families, they became prime vectors of transmission. The city began to run out of doctors and nurses. Forty-two thousand more had to be brought in from elsewhere to treat the sick. Luckily, methods were found that protected all the new health-care workers: none—zero—were infected.

But those methods were Draconian. As the city was locked down and cut off from outside visitors, health-care workers seeing at-risk patients were housed away from their families. They wore full-body protective gear, including goggles, complete head coverings, N95 particle-filtering masks, and hazmat-style suits. Could we do that here? Not a chance. Health-care facilities don’t remotely have the supplies that would allow staff members to see every patient with all that gear on. In Massachusetts, where I practice surgery, the virus is circulating in at least eleven of our fourteen counties, and cases are climbing rapidly. So what happens if you are exposed to a coronavirus patient and you don’t have the ability to go full Wuhan? My hospital system, Partners HealthCare, has already sent more than a hundred staff members home for fourteen days of self-quarantine because they were exposed to the coronavirus without complete protection. If we had to quarantine every health-care worker who might have come into contact with a COVID-19 patient, we’d soon have no health-care workers left.

Yet there are lessons to be learned from two places that saw the new coronavirus before we did and that have had success in controlling its spread. Hong Kong and Singapore—both the size of my state—detected their first cases in late January, and the number of cases escalated rapidly. Officials banned large gatherings, directed people to work from home, and encouraged social distancing. Testing was ramped up as quickly as possible. But even these measures were never going to be enough if the virus kept propagating among health-care workers and facilities. Primary-care clinics and hospitals in the two countries, like in the U.S., didn’t have enough gowns and N95 masks, and, at first, tests weren’t widely available. After six weeks, though, they had a handle on the outbreak. Hospitals weren’t overrun with patients. By now, businesses and government offices have even begun reopening, and focus has shifted to controlling the cases coming into the country.

Here are their key tactics, drawn from official documents and discussions I’ve had with health-care leaders in each place. All health-care workers are expected to wear regular surgical masks for all patient interactions, to use gloves and proper hand hygiene, and to disinfect all surfaces in between patient consults. Patients with suspicious symptoms (a low-grade fever coupled with a cough, respiratory complaints, fatigue, or muscle aches) or exposures (travel to places with viral spread or contact with someone who tested positive) are separated from the rest of the patient population, and treated—wherever possible—in separate respiratory wards and clinics, in separate locations, with separate teams. Social distancing is practiced within clinics and hospitals: waiting-room chairs are placed six feet apart; direct interactions among staff members are conducted at a distance; doctors and patients stay six feet apart except during examinations.

What’s equally interesting is what they don’t do. The use of N95 masks, face-protectors, goggles, and gowns are reserved for procedures where respiratory secretions can be aerosolized (for example, intubating a patient for anesthesia) and for known or suspected cases of COVID-19. Their quarantine policies are more nuanced, too. What happens when someone unexpectedly tests positive—say, a hospital co-worker or a patient in a primary-care office or an emergency room? In Hong Kong and Singapore, they don’t shut the place down or put everyone under home quarantine. They do their best to trace every contact and then quarantine only those who had close contact with the infected person. In Hong Kong, “close contact” means fifteen minutes at a distance of less than six feet and without the use of a surgical mask; in Singapore, thirty minutes. If the exposure is shorter than the prescribed limit but within six feet for more than two minutes, workers can stay on the job if they wear a surgical mask and have twice-daily temperature checks. People who have had brief, incidental contact are just asked to monitor themselves for symptoms.

The fact that these measures have succeeded in flattening the COVID-19 curve carries some hopeful implications. One is that this coronavirus, even though it appears to be more contagious than the flu, can still be managed by the standard public-health playbook: social distancing, basic hand hygiene and cleaning, targeted isolation and quarantine of the ill and those with high-risk exposure, a surge in health-care capacity (supplies, testing, personnel, wards), and coördinated, unified public communications with clear, transparent, up-to-date guidelines and data. Our government officials have been unforgivably slow to get these in place. We’ve been playing from behind. But we now seem to be moving in the right direction, and the experience in Asia suggests that extraordinary precautions don’t seem to be required to stop it. Those of us who must go out into the world and have contact with people don’t have to panic if we find out that someone with the coronavirus has been in the same room or stood closer than we wanted for a moment. Transmission seems to occur primarily through sustained exposure in the absence of basic protection or through the lack of hand hygiene after contact with secretions.

Consider a couple of data points. Singapore so far appears not to have had a single recorded health-care-related transmission of the coronavirus, despite the hundreds of cases that its medical system has had to deal with. That includes one case reported this week of a critically ill pneumonia patient who exposed forty-one health-care workers in the course of four days before being diagnosed with COVID-19. These were high-risk exposures, including exposures during intubation and hands-on intensive care. Eighty-five per cent of the workers used only surgical masks. Yet, owing to proper hand hygiene, none became infected.

Our early experiences in the U.S. have so far been similar. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in the face of limited information, recommended stricter precautions than have been employed in Asia, putting health-care workers on fourteen-day self-quarantine if they are exposed to an infected person for even a few minutes without protection, including a mask and goggles. That policy was implemented at U.C. Davis Medical Center, where the first case of community transmission was diagnosed, in late February. Eighty-nine health-care workers involved in the patient’s care were put under self-quarantine. None, it turned out, had been infected. Sacramento, Seattle, and San Francisco became coronavirus hot spots; as of this writing, however, significant occupational transmission has not been found.

This content was originally published here.

Posted in Health | Comments closed

Septic Tank Teeth (abridged) – International Academy of Biological Dentistry and Medicine

Root canals are dead bodies (and, as such, should be buried six feet below Earth’s surface)!

By R.S. Carlson, DDS

Let us get clear about the issue, really.

Some will argue that the “gangrene of the tooth” is limited to the soft tissue within the tooth’s pulp chamber, gangrenous pulpitis; that the hard exoskeleton of the dental organ—Odonton—has no relationship to being alive, and, therefore, could not be considered gangrenous.

But there is a corpse in the attic.

Goldman DDS, et al, does this in his attacks regarding the safety of “gangrene of the dental organ—the human tooth” without a deeper understanding of the mechanisms of tissue physiology, biology, chemo-electro-magnetic homeostasis, and the compelling dependent interrelationship of these specific layers of the dental organ (tooth and supporting structures including proximal alveolar bone of its jaw segment) starting from the inward to the outward with:

The following schematic diagrams will illustrate the fundamentals of fluid flow to the outside and begin to transmit that the circulatory system is essential for the oral-dental health of the human being.

The migration of electrolytes—the flow of all kinds of fluids from deeper tissues within—beginning with the apical alveolar bone and intimately connected radicular bone outward through all the tissue layers previously mentioned above, 2) through 8), is well documented. Lamaras, Leonora, and Steinmann have documented this beyond argument. One may offer without evidence to the contrary that “teeth sweat,” just as the human skin sweats, eyes tear, toxic gas vapors come out of the lungs, and waste products from metabolism are excreted in the form of gas, urine, and fecal matter.

Everything from the inside of the human body flows to the outside for life to live. This is true with the Odontons, also. Gangrene in a little fingertip includes the nail. Gangrene of the fingertip bone and soft tissue, including the nail, is treated by surgical resection of the entire fingertip, including the nail. The hand surgeon does not reattach the nail to the dead bone and soft tissue. What we do in dental surgery is reattach the nail to a little fingertip by doing a root canal.

It is a grave misperception, pardon the pun, to be informed that a root canal (root cadaver) is a normal and healthy way to retain a “devital tooth”—dead tooth. In an early January 1968 morning lecture at the University of Michigan School of Dentistry, we students were told to “never refer to a gangrenous tooth as being dead. Say it is ‘devital.’ You’ll get better acceptance of root canal therapy in your dental practice.”

How true this was – until I began to question the practice of root canal therapy myself. After a year of intense investigation into the other side of the issue we so blithely accepted as students, I concluded in 1981 that this practice was physiologically and biologically unacceptable.

So what do I suggest instead of root canal therapy in my practice to save the dental organ, the tooth? Simply, extract or remove dead and dying tissues form the mouth and jaws. “If it is dead, it should be out of your head!

Logic will offer that dentistry is the only profession that advocates the practice of leaving gangrenous tissue in the human body. The definition of gangrene is: the death of tissue due to loss of blood supply. The reason a tooth dies is due to lack of blood supply.

When the tooth dies, it is a dead body, or organ, in one’s mouth. No amount of medication or scrapping inside the tooth will make it sterile or save it. Asks your doctor about this: Ask, “After you treat me, will the root canal tooth be sterile and will it remain so?” It is like being half alive or half pregnant. What can your dentist say?: “Oh, it’s half sterile”? It is or it isn’t!

When there is gangrene in any part of the body, the good surgeon will remove that from your main body. If he does not and knew about it, he is subject to legal action, for this is ethically and morally bad practice.

But we dentists get a bye. “Well,” we say, “it is only a tooth, and how could that hurt you?” Ask the many who have suffered that route of treatment. They will tell you.
When an animal dies or when we die, where do we put the body? We put it into the ground for sanitation purposes, for civilized society demands this. And this is where all dead teeth should be put, too.

The vibrations of a root cadaver are those of a dead human body. The chemicals given off by dead bodies are cadaverine and putracene, to name but two, and many kinds of bacteria, viruses, molds, and fungi. These leach out of the continuously decaying, decomposing, tooth structure into your blood stream. We knew this 100 years ago, and microbiologists and other scientists are now revisiting this truth – that every part of your body is connected to every other part; 80 trillion cells, all connected.

So where should you put your root canal teeth?

Most certainly in the ground, but only after you separate your human body from the dead body in your mouth, your root cadavers. These you see here are routine pictures of dead teeth:

Dead RC tooth with black gangrene

This dead tooth shows abscess and black.

Two RC teeth are black with abscess.

RC teeth with moth eaten root

Black RC tooth with abscess attached

RC with absecss attached to root

Marble bone about root tips of RCs abscess

Shadows about root tips are abscess

The pathological tissues such as granuloma, cysts, abscesses, marked acute/chronic inflammation, and necrotic bone, to name a few, are the drainage field of the septic tooth. Nature attempts to prevent toxic dissemination throughout the full biome thus insuring its health, hopefully.

A septic tank analogy is valid here in that the dead tooth or dental implant is a reservoir for corrupt matter and their liquids and gases, leaking out into the underlying bone, lymphatic, blood vascular, neurological tissues—apical tissues.

After removal of a gangrenous tooth, a root canal tooth or implant—both septic conditions, what should you do?

Replace the missing tooth, if you can.

Many dental doctors today will advise that you should do a dental implant or traditional fixed bridge to replace your missing tooth. They have no alternatives to avoid leaving you with whittled down teeth looking like pegs or a very invasive, potentially damaging bone/jaw procedure of implant surgery where a hole is drilled into your bone through your gums and a screw post inserted. After 4 to 6 months of healing, if all goes well, the screw post will be topped off with a crown of some kind.

My advice is to avoid implants, flippers, or traditional bridges that require the mutilation of the support teeth. Focus on replacement with the Carlson Bridge® “Winged Pontic” tooth replacement system. In this regard, we simply attach a prefabricated tooth, a “Winged Pontic,” to the good support teeth on either side of the space.

To learn more about some of the problems associated with dental implants, see Dr. Carlson’s article “Actinomycotic Oral Infection (Modern Dental Implants and Root Canals)” in the Biological Dentistry Journal.

Dr. RS Carlson graduated from the University of Michigan School of Dentistry in 1969 and completed Post Graduate training in pediatric dentistry with Strong-Carter Dental Clinic, Honolulu, Hawaii, 1970—71. He is a founder of Kokua Kalihi Valley Dental Clinic in 1973 and volunteered from 1973 to 1980, serving low-income families and immigrant populations from the South Pacific Islands and Asia. He has maintained a private practice in Honolulu since 1971, emphasizing Bio-Logical Dentistry. He can be reached at (808) 735-0282, ddscarlson@hawaiiantel.net or carlsonbiologicaldentistry.com. Disclosure: Dr. Carlson is the inventor of the Carlson Bridge® “Winged Pontic” tooth replacement system, a noninvasive approach to replacing missing teeth, with patents issued in November 1999 and October 2001.

This content was originally published here.

Posted in Dentistry | Comments closed

Concerts Won’t Return Until “Fall 2021 at the Earliest,” Health Expert Warns | Consequence of Sound

Large-scale gatherings such as conferences, sport events, and live concerts won’t be safe to attend until “fall 2021 at the earliest,” according to Zeke Emmanuel, director of the Healthcare Transformation Institute at the University of Pennsylvania.

Emmanuel was part of an expert panel assembled by the New York Times on life after the COVID-19 pandemic. The problem, according to Emmanuel, is “You can’t just flip a switch and open the whole of society up. It’s just not going to work. It’s too much. The virus will definitely flare back to the worst levels.”

As he sees it, “restarting the economy has to be done in stages,” and crowded events will be the last part of our old lives to return. He said,

“It does have to start with more physical distancing at a work site that allows people who are at lower risk to come back. Certain kinds of construction, or manufacturing or offices, in which you can maintain six-foot distances are more reasonable to start sooner. Larger gatherings — conferences, concerts, sporting events — when people say they’re going to reschedule this conference or graduation event for October 2020, I have no idea how they think that’s a plausible possibility. I think those things will be the last to return. Realistically we’re talking fall 2021 at the earliest.”

So why do we have to wait until the second half of 2021? That has to do with the development timeline of the coronavirus vaccine. And Emmanuel isn’t alone in thinking a vaccine will take 12-18 months — in fact, that seems to be the expert consensus.

Larry Brilliant, the epidemiologist who led the effort to eradicate smallpox, told The Economist, “I think we will have a vaccine that works in less than a couple of months.” Unfortunately, that’s the easy part. “Then it will be the arduous process of making sure that it is effective enough and that it is not harmful. And then we have to produce it. [America’s Director National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases] Tony Fauci’s estimate of 12 to 18 months before we have a vaccine, in sufficient quantities in place, is one that I agree with.”

But Brilliant, who also consulted on the 2011 Steven Soderbergh film Contagion, sounds even more pessimistic than Emmanuel. He thinks the COVID-19 virus will still be a problem — at least for a while — after the development of a vaccine.

“I just want to mention, once we have that vaccine, and we’ve mass vaccinated as many people as we could, there will still be outbreaks. People are not adding on to the backend of that time period the fact that we will then be chasing outbreaks, ping-pong-ing back and forth between countries. We will need to have the equivalent of the polio-eradication program or the smallpox-eradication program, hopefully at the WHO. And that mop-up—I hate to use that word when we’re talking about human beings—but that follow-on effort will take an additional period of time before we are truly safe.”

In other words, the re-opening of society will be slower and more painful than some are anticipating.

For now musicians have adapted with quarantine videos and isolation livestreams, as when Willie Nelson announced a digital Farm Aid with Neil Young, Dave Matthews, and more over the weekend. For a full list of upcoming concerts and livestreams, click here. But that’s not going to replace the lost revenue stream for middle-class and rising artists. If you want to help musicians impacted by the novel coronavirus, or are yourself a musician looking for help, check out our pandemic resource guide.

This content was originally published here.

Posted in Health | Comments closed

How to get bargain dentistry and a vacation to boot | The Seattle Times

“Do you want numbing gel?” the dental technician asked me as she prepared to plunge into my mouth.

In the entire history of dentistry, from caveman days to now, who has ever said no to more painkiller? Smear that gel around like spackle! She did. And then ground and scraped. And scraped and ground, for a full hour and a half.

Ninety minutes later, I was writhing in a different kind of pain. The office assistant handed me a bill for $930. That was $900 for root planing and $30 for the numbing gel. I had to bite my gel-numbed tongue to avoid asking why they stopped there. “Sir, would you prefer we do this while you lie on the floor or would you prefer the Chair Package?” “Care for our Adequate Lighting Option?”

Worse: This was just the beginning. The dentist said I needed at least four crowns — at about $1,500 each. While that’s about the average cost of crowns around our home in Maryland, according to our insurer, that would probably be about $5,000 more than our insurance would cover.

I was moaning about this to my brother-in-law who lives in Norway, and he said people there fly to Hungary for good, affordable dentistry. A little Googling about dental tourism had me sold. The savings from crossing the border can appear remarkable. Crowns that cost $1,500 would run just $300 to $600 apiece in Mexico or Costa Rica, I found. No wonder medical and dental tourism is a booming business. The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis says Americans spent $2.6 billion on medical and dental tourism in 2018. That’s up from just $757 million in 2008. While there are no reliable counts of how many people leave the U.S. for discount foreign dentistry, officials in Costa Rica, a hub for dental tourism, estimate that tourists spent more than $200 million on implants, crowns, veneers and other tooth care there in 2017.

Of course, a cheap but bad dentist is no bargain. Traveling to a foreign country for discount dentistry certainly has additional hassles and risks. The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warns that local standards of facilities and training may be lower than in the U.S. and that mistakes in translation or communication can result in mistreatment. Also of concern for anyone having major work done: Flying shortly after any kind of surgery heightens the risk of deadly blood clots.

Advertising

But putting off needed dental care also has risks. So, I was determined to try it.

First, to find that good and affordable overseas dentist. I opted for Costa Rica because I’d never been there, it had a good reputation for dental tourism, and I’d heard it was a great place to vacation. Why not offset the pain with a little pleasure? Googling for Costa Rican dentists returns almost 1.8 million results. To narrow my choices, I used a facilitator, or broker. I figured that was safer, since the dentists are beholden to him for repeat business.

While it’s difficult to suss out legitimate online reviews of anything anymore, I chose a broker who seemed to get real-sounding praise on sites like TripAdvisor. I sent him my X-rays and my American dentist’s treatment proposal. He distributed those to several Costa Rican dentists, who sent back bids. I chose one who passed my wife’s online investigation. The facilitator also handled travel, arranging for a hotel ($75 a night), airport pickup and transportation to the dentist’s office. He didn’t charge me for this service. He collects commissions from the dentist and hotel.

I arrived in San Jose, Costa Rica, on a Tuesday, and the next day a driver whisked me to the clinic, where I was reassured. I saw state-of-the-art equipment and learned that several of the dentists had trained at American dental schools. My dentist had done some training at Baylor College of Dentistry in Texas, now Texas A&M College of Dentistry. The staff was fluent in English.

After his examination ($80), the Costa Rican dentist announced he thought I needed five crowns. (I really should have flossed more.) The cost: $500 each. I said yes.

At home, a wise person would probably spread out this kind of ordeal. But the Costa Rican dentist was eager to get everything done right away, and my time was limited. So, for the next 6 1/2 hours they ground and they pierced and they grated and they chipped. That’s a lot of Novocain. And the conversation among staffers was in rapid Spanish, which Americans who don’t speak the language might find disconcerting.

It would take a few days to make the crowns, so my wife and I took a short flight to the Drake Bay area, where we snorkeled, swam and poked around the mangroves. My mouth was sore for about a day, but ibuprofen and a few refreshing “leche de pantera” nonalcoholic cocktails took care of that.

When I returned to San Jose for the final fitting, an interesting thing happened. One crown did not sit perfectly. The dentist explained that he could grind it down, but the best practice was to cast a new one. That, however, would take time, and he knew my schedule was tight. I appreciated his honesty, and it was nice to be given a choice. I opted to wait for the new crown, which he glued on the night before my flight home. It fit perfectly.

Total dental bill: $2,580, including anesthetics. Because our dental plan is a Preferred Provider Organization, Aetna says we can be reimbursed for some of this expense, but it is still working on that.

My wife’s and my airfare and a week in a San Jose hotel ran about $1,000. Throw in $500 for meals and incidentals, and the total cost of the dental trip/vacation came in under $4,100. People who live close to Mexico and can drive across the border to dental centers such as Los Algodones would have much lower costs.

That math shows that dental tourism for people who live far from the Mexican border makes economic sense only if you require significant expensive dentistry, like crowns, implants or veneers, costing more than about $5,000 in the U.S. But in return for the savings — and the cheap tropical vacation — you have to be comfortable traveling in a foreign country and willing to accept a little extra risk.

Generally, your local dentist will repair a loose crown he or she installed at no charge in the first year or two. If something goes wrong with my Costa Rican crowns, I’ll probably have to pay a local dentist about what it cost to do a crown to take care of that. But after more than six months, I’ve had no complaints.

I can only say that most guests at my San Jose hotel were there for the dentistry. Most were return customers. They had beautiful smiles.

And nice tans.

Kim Clark contributed to this report.

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation which is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

Visit Kaiser Health News at www.khn.org

This content was originally published here.

Posted in Dentistry | Comments closed

Behind the Scenes at Our Invisalign® Treatment Consultation – Happy Mothering

Last Updated on

This post was sponsored by the Invisalign® brand and all opinions expressed in my post are my own.

A couple of months ago, we were presented with the opportunity to partner with the Invisalign® brand for complimentary treatment for our daughters. Our girls are 9 and 11, so they’re right at the age where we are exploring different options for orthodontic treatment. We knew Zoë definitely needed to have her overbite corrected and Kaylee has expressed interest in having her teeth straightened, so they were both pretty excited to go see the orthodontist.

We were worried about braces since snowboarding is such a huge part of the girls’ lives. I can’t imagine how painful it would be to smack your face with braces. So the idea of Invisalign treatment over traditional braces was definitely appealing to all of us.

To find out if they qualified for treatment, we scheduled an initial consultation for both girls! Brian even created a really great video of our entire visit so you can actually experience the initial consultation first hand. After watching the video, you can read more details about our experience under the video.

What is Invisalign Treatment?

If you’re not familiar with Invisalign treatment, it’s an alternative to traditional braces. It’s actually considered the most advanced aligner system in the world! Unlike braces, Invisalign treatment is a convenient system for straightening teeth that allows you to remove the nearly clear aligners to enjoy the foods you love and maintain good oral hygiene.

How it works is that you get a series of clear aligners made that will slowly straighten your teeth by shifting them just a little bit at a time. The material the aligners are made from has been shown to straighten teeth more predictably than any other clear aligners*, so that’s something to keep in mind when you’re considering your options. I was surprised to learn that Invisalign clear aligners are able to move teeth horizontally, vertically, and can even rotate them if necessary. I always assumed, incorrectly, that they were only for minor corrections.

* Compared to off-the-shelf, single layer .030in material

Since they’ve been on the market for over 20 years now, they’ve had a lot of experience helping people with everything from simple to complex orthodontic cases. So far, more than 6 million people have gone through Invisalign treatment**.

** Data on file at Align Technology as of October 29, 2018

Since our daughters snowboard and are very active, we were much more interested in Invisalign clear aligners than traditional braces.

In case you’re curious, the cost of Invisalign treatment is often comparable to braces and many dental insurance plans cover Invisalign aligners just as they would any other orthodontic treatment, so check with your provider.

Our Initial Consultation

Our initial consultation was with Hoff Orthodontics, which is a local Invisalign-trained orthodontic practice.

When we first walked in, we were greeted and checked in. Then we were given a tour of the office.

After the tour, it was straight over to imaging for both girls. They took pictures of their face, all of their teeth and their bite.

Then did a 3D scan of their heads so we could see everything that is going on.

We then headed back over to the Dr. Hoff’s office where he could examine the girls’ mouths and talk about the imaging with us. We discussed Kaylee first since she’s younger.

Kaylee Still Has a Lot of Baby Teeth

Right now, Kaylee isn’t quite ready for Invisalign clear aligners because she still has too many baby teeth, as you can see in the 3D image of her head. We did learn, however, that she needed to have a special retainer made to hold space in her mouth for her adult teeth to come in properly.

We’ll reevaluate whether she’s a good candidate for Invisalign treatment again when she has lost her baby teeth.

Zoë is Ready for Invisalign Treatment

After we finished up talking about Kaylee, it was time to talk about Zoë. She just turned 11, but she only has one baby tooth left. We knew she had an overbite, but we didn’t realize she had other things in her mouth that needed to be corrected like a cross-bite.

Dr. Hoff explained, in detail, the issues with Zoë’s teeth, then concluded that she would be a good candidate for Invisalign treatment. He expects her treatment to take up to two years to complete.

He explained the advantages of Invisalign treatment over traditional braces to us (you can watch his full talk in the video above). Some of the points he made were that eating food is easier since braces aren’t in the way and maintaining good oral hygiene is easier since you’re not trying to brush around brackets. You simply remove your aligners in order to eat, brush, and floss as you normally would.

We live in the mountains and have to drive over an hour each way to the orthodontist. That’s no big deal, we’re used to it, but with traditional braces, there are emergencies that need to be addressed. A bracket comes loose, a wire breaks or the wire is poking into your child’s gums and it’s straight to the orthodontist to get it fixed.

You don’t have those same issues with Invisalign clear aligners. There are no wires to worry about and no emergency appointments to fix them if they break. That is a huge reassurance for us since we do live so far from the orthodontist.

No More Pink Goo: On to Digital Impressions

After we decided that Zoë was ready for treatment, it was straight to get the scans to have her Invisalign clear aligners made. It was such a fascinating process! You have to watch the video further up in this post to see how it works.

When I had braces, I had to bite into that messy pink goo to get my impressions done. It tasted awful and it made me gag. If you had braces, then you probably have vivid memories of that experience too. While you can still use the goo for impressions if your practice doesn’t have a digital scanner, you can now also receive impressions digitally with Invisalign treatment, on their iTero® digital scanner. My sweet daughter didn’t have to experience my childhood memory of the pink goo.

The iTero® scanner takes thousands (6,000 to be exact***) of images every second to recreate a 3D digital image of the inside of your child’s mouth on the computer. This allows the orthodontist to create a treatment plan and the Invisalign brand to create your child’s clear aligners.

*** Data on file at Align Technology as of November 7, 2018

When they’re done scanning, you even get to see a rendering of what your child’s new smile could look like. It’s really neat!

Follow Zoë’s Invisalign Treatment Journey

We’ll be talking about Zoë’s Invisalign treatment journey on the blog and social media over the next year. In the next post, you’ll get to see Zoë in her Invisalign clear aligners, so stay tuned!

Find an Invisalign Treatment Provider

If you’re curious whether Invisalign treatment is right for your child, you can use the Doctor Locator feature on the Invisalign® brand website to find an Invisalign-trained orthodontist in your area.

Have you or your child had Invisalign treatment? I’d love to hear your experience in the comments.

Pin this post to your Parenting or Health board!

What do you want to read next?

This content was originally published here.

Posted in Orthodontics | Comments closed

‘Now Is the Time for Solidarity’: Bernie Sanders Addresses Health and Economic Crisis Facing US as Coronavirus Spreads

Good afternoon, everybody. In the last few days, we have seen the crisis of the coronavirus continue to grow exponentially.

Let me be absolutely clear: in terms of potential deaths and the impact on our economy, the crisis we face from coronavirus is on the scale of a major war, and we must act accordingly.

Nobody knows how many fatalities we may see, but they could equal or surpass the U.S. casualties we saw in World War II.

It is an absolute moral imperative that our response — as a government, as a society, as business communities, and as individuals — meets the enormity of this crisis.

As people work from home and are directed to self-quarantine, it will be easy to feel like we are in this alone, or that we must only worry about ourselves and let everyone else fend for themselves.

That is a very dangerous mistake. First and foremost, we must remember that we are in this together.

Now is the time for solidarity. We must fight with love and compassion for those most vulnerable to the effects of this pandemic.

If our neighbor or co-worker gets sick, we have the potential to get sick. If our neighbors lose their jobs, then our local economies suffer, and we may lose our jobs. If doctors and nurses do not have the equipment and staffing capacity they need now, people we know and love may die.

Unfortunately, in this time of international crisis, the current administration is largely incompetent, and its incompetence and recklessness has threatened the lives of many people.

So today I’d like to give an overview of what we must do as a nation.

First – we are dealing with a national emergency and the president should declare one now.

Next, because President Trump is unable and unwilling to lead selflessly, we must immediately convene an emergency, bipartisan authority of experts to support and direct a response that is comprehensive, compassionate, and based first and foremost on science and fact.

We must aggressively make certain that the public and private sectors are cooperating with each other. And we need national and state hotlines staffed with well-trained people who have the best information available.

Among many questions, people need to know: what are the symptoms of coronavirus? When should I seek medical treatment? Where do I go for a test?

The American people deserve transparency, something the Trump administration has fought day after day to stifle. We need daily information — clear, science-based information — from credible scientific voices, not politicians.

And during this crisis, we must make sure we care for the communities most vulnerable to the health and economic pain that’s coming — those in nursing homes and rehabilitation facilities, those confined in immigration detention centers, those who are currently incarcerated, and all people regardless of immigration status.

Unfortunately, the United States is at a severe disadvantage, because, unlike every other major country on earth, we do not guarantee health care as a human right. The result is that millions of people in this country cannot afford to go to a doctor, let alone pay for a coronavirus test.

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

Never Miss a Beat.

Get our best delivered to your inbox.

So while we work to pass a Medicare for All single-payer system, the United States government must be clear that in the midst of this emergency, that everyone in our country — regardless of income or where they live — must be able to get all of the health care they need without cost.

Obviously, when a vaccine or other effective treatment is developed, it must be free of charge.

We cannot live in a nation where if you have the money you get the treatment you need to survive, but if you’re working class or poor you get to the end of the line. That would be morally unacceptable.

Further, we need emergency funding right now for paid family and medical leave.  Anyone who is sick should be able to stay home during this emergency, and receive their paycheck. 

What we do not want to see is at a time when half of our people are living paycheck to paycheck, when they need to go to work in order to take care of their family, we do not want to see people going to work who are sick and can spread the coronavirus.

We also need an immediate expansion of community health centers in this country so that every American will have access to a nearby healthcare facility.

Where do I go? How do I get a test? How do I get the results of that test? We need greatly to expand our primary health care capabilities in this country and that includes expanding community health care centers.

We need to determine the status of our testing and processing for the coronavirus. The government must respond aggressively to make certain that we in fact do have the latest and most effective test available, and the quickest means of processing those tests.

There are other countries around the world who are doing better than we are in that regard. We should be learning from them.

No one disputes that there is a major shortage of ICU units, and ventilators that are needed to respond to this crisis. The federal government must work aggressively with the private sector to make sure that this equipment is available to hospitals and the rest of the medical community.

Our current healthcare system does not have the doctors and nurses we currently need. We are understaffed. During this crisis, we need to mobilize medical residents, retired medical professionals, and other medical personnel to help us deal with this crisis.

We need to make sure that doctors, nurses and medical professionals have the instructions and personal protective equipment that they need.

This is not only because we care about the well-being of medical professionals — but also because if they go down, our capability to respond to this crisis is significantly diminished.

The pharmaceutical industry must be told in no uncertain terms that the medicines that they manufacture for this crisis will be sold at cost. This is not the time for profiteering or price gouging.

The coronavirus is already causing a global economic meltdown, which is impacting people throughout the world and in our own country, and it is especially dangerous for low income and working families the most. People who today, before the crisis, were struggling economically.

Instead of providing more tax breaks to the top one percent and large corporations, we need to provide economic assistance to the elderly – and I worry very much about elderly people in this country today, many of whom are isolated and many of whom do not have a lot of money.

We need to worry about those who are already sick. We need to worry about working families with children, people with disabilities, the homeless and all those who are vulnerable.

We need to provide in that context emergency unemployment assistance to anyone who loses their job through no fault of their own. 

Right now, 23 percent of those who are eligible to receive unemployment compensation do not receive it. 

Under our proposal, everyone who loses a job must qualify for unemployment compensation at least 100 percent of their prior salary with a cap of $1,150 a week or $60,000 a year. 

In addition, those who depend on tips – and the restaurant industry is suffering very much from the meltdown – gig workers, domestic workers, and independent contractors shall also qualify for unemployment insurance to make up for the income that they lose during this crisis.

We need to make sure that the elderly, people with disabilities and families with children have access to nutritious food. That means expanding the Meals on Wheel program, the school lunch program and SNAP so that no one goes hungry during this crisis and everyone who cannot leave their home can receive nutritious meals delivered directly to where they live.

We need also in this economic crisis to place an immediate moratorium on evictions, foreclosures, and on utility shut-offs so that no one loses their home during this crisis and that everyone has access to clean water, electricity, heat and air conditioning.

We need to construct emergency homeless shelters to make sure that the homeless, survivors of domestic violence and college students quarantined off campus are able to receive the shelter, the healthcare and the nutrition they need.

We need to provide emergency lending to small and medium sized businesses to cover payroll, new construction of manufacturing facilities, and production of emergency supplies such as masks and ventilators.

Here is the bottom line. When we are dealing with this crisis, we need to listen to the scientists, to the researchers, to the medical folks, not politicians.

We need an emergency response to this crisis and we need it now.

We need more doctors and nurses in underserved areas.

We need to make sure that workers who lose their jobs in this crisis receive the unemployment assistance they need.

And in this moment, we need to make sure that in the future after this crisis is behind us, we build a health care system that makes sure that every person in this country is guaranteed the health care that they need. 

This content was originally published here.

Posted in Health | Comments closed

Public Health Experts: Single-Payer Systems Coping With Coronavirus More Effectively Than For-Profit Model

As the coronavirus pandemic places extraordinary strain on national healthcare systems around the world, public health experts are making the case that countries with universal single-payer systems have thus far responded more efficiently and effectively to the outbreak than nations like the United States, whose fragmented for-profit apparatus has struggled to cope with the growing crisis.

“There is no need for people to worry about the tests or vaccine or cost of care if people become ill.”
—Helen Buckingham, Nuffield Trust

“It is too soon to see definite outcomes among competing healthcare systems. But even in this early phase, public health experts say the single-payer, state-run systems are proving themselves relatively robust,” the Washington Post reported Sunday. “Unlike the United States, where a top health official told Congress the rollout of testing was ‘failing‘ and where Congress is only now moving through a bill that includes free testing, the single-payer countries have been especially nimble at making free, or low-cost, virus screening widely available for patients with coughs and fevers.”

While the Trump administration only recently took steps to massively expand COVID-19 testing—sparking concerns that the outbreak in the U.S. is far more severe than official numbers suggest—countries with forms of single-payer healthcare like South Korea and Denmark have for weeks been offering “drive-through” testing and other innovative mechanisms, allowing them to quickly test hundreds of thousands of their citizens and respond accordingly.

“Unhampered government intervention into the healthcare sector is an advantage when the virus is spreading fast across the country,” said Choi Jae-wook, a professor of preventive medicine at Korea University in Seoul.

South Korea has done more than just “flatten the curve” of new Covid-19 infections. It bought the curve down through:
– Aggressive testing (20,000 tests daily, “drive through” testing)/isolation
– School holiday extended
– Government advice to stay inside
– large events cancelled pic.twitter.com/MGzuX9Oc6w

— Tom Hancock (@hancocktom) March 13, 2020

Jorgen Kurtzhals, the head of the University of Copenhagen medical school, told the Post that the strength of Denmark’s single-payer system is that it has “a lot of really highly educated and well-trained staff, and given some quite un-detailed instructions, they can actually develop plans for an extremely rapid response.”

“We don’t have to worry too much about whether this response or that response demands specific payments here and there,” said Kurtzhals said. “We are aware that there will be huge expenditure within the system. But we’re not too concerned about it because we have a direct line of communication from the national government to the regional government to the hospital directors.”

None of which is to say that countries with forms of single-payer healthcare or nationalized systems are flawlessly handling the COVID-19 pandemic, which has infected at least 173,000 people and killed more than 6,000 worldwide.

“We don’t have to worry too much about whether this response or that response demands specific payments here and there.”
—Jorgen Kurtzhals, University of Copenhagen

Britain’s National Health Service (NHS), following years of austerity imposed by Conservative governments, is facing staff and supply shortages as hospitals are being overwhelmed with patients. Canada, like the U.K., is struggling with a shortage of ventilators.

But Helen Buckingham, director of strategy and operations at the London-based Nuffield Trust think tank, told the Post that the NHS is in a relatively good position to cope with COVID-19 because it has “a very clear emergency planning structure.”

Additionally, Buckingham noted, “there is no need for people to worry about the tests or vaccine or cost of care if people become ill.”

David Fisman, an epidemiologist at the University of Toronto, said that in a “time of crisis” like the coronavirus pandemic, “having a healthcare system that’s a public strategic asset rather than a business run for profit allows for a degree of coordination and optimal use of resources.”

During the Democratic presidential primary debate Sunday night in Washington, D.C., former Vice President Joe Biden cited Italy’s struggles to contain COVID-19 as evidence that the Medicare for All system advocated by rival candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) would not be effective in a pandemic. Italy has been the hardest-hit country outside China with nearly 25,000 cases of the novel coronavirus.

“With all due respect for Medicare for All, you have a single-payer system in Italy,” said Biden. “It doesn’t work there.”

Critics were quick to take issue with Biden’s talking point. “[Single-payer] isn’t the reason Italy is having problems,” tweeted HuffPost healthcare reporter Jonathan Cohn. “Italy’s problem is health system capacity. Independent of health system design.”

This is the dumbest point. No, single payer does not solve the problem of pandemics. But it definitely solves the problem of thousands and thousands of people going bankrupt because there’s a pandemic. It solves the problem of people not seeking out care for fear of bankruptcy. https://t.co/L2Cx2VJGZj

— Jill Filipovic (@JillFilipovic) March 16, 2020

Dr. David Himmelstein, co-founder of Physicians for a National Health Program and distinguished professor of public health at the City University of New York at Hunter College, said in a statement Sunday night that the “fragmented system” in the United States “leaves public health separate and disconnected from medical care, and provides no mechanism to appropriately balance funding priorities.”

“As a result, public health accounts for less than 3 percent of overall health expenditures, a percentage that has been falling for decades, and is about half the proportion in Canada or the U.K.,” said Himmselstein. “One result is that state and local health departments that are the front lines in dealing with epidemics have lost 50,000 position since 2008 due to budget cuts.”

On the debate stage Sunday evening, Sanders made the case for transitioning the U.S. to a single-payer program, arguing that the coronavirus “exposes the incredible weakness and dysfunctionality of our current healthcare system.”

“How in God’s name does it happen,” said Sanders, “that we end up with 87 million people who are uninsured or underinsured and there are people who are watching this program tonight who are saying, ‘I’m not feeling well. Should I go to the doctor? But I can’t afford to go to the doctor. What happens if I am sick?'”

“So the word has got to go out, and I certainly would do this as president:  You don’t worry,” Sanders added. “People of America, do not worry about the cost of prescription drugs. Do not worry about the cost of the healthcare that you’re going to get, because we are a nation—a civilized democratic society. Everybody, rich and poor, middle class, will get the care they need. The drug companies will not rip us off.”

This content was originally published here.

Posted in Health | Comments closed