I KNOW MY DOCTOR SAYS TO TAKE ANTIBIOTICS WHEN GOING TO THE DENTIST OR HAVING SURGERY, BUT WHAT ABOUT BLEEDING GUMS (FROM HEAVY BRUSHING)OR MOUTH CANKER SORES? WOULDN'T HAVING THOSE BE THE SAME AS BLEEDING GUMS AT THE DENTIST? I AM ON ATENOLOL 50 MGS AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU FOR YOUR RESPONSE.
Follow Ups:
Re: mvp (addendum--antibiotics no longer recommended with dental procedures in heart patients)
Posted by Walt Stoll on December 02, 1998 at 12:05:15:
In Reply to: mvp posted by Dana Sieben on December 01, 1998 at 22:29:24:
Dear Dana,
A very large, and very well done, study was just published by a prestigious dental school showing that the antibiotics before surgery, dental procedures, etc., with ANY heart valvular problem MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE WITH PREVENTING ENDOCARDITIS which is the ONLY thing they were ever used for.
When talking about MVP the discussion becomes ludicrous since it is a FAD diagnosis that has no symptoms and will no longer be made within 10 years.
If you have read much on this BB, you have come across the famous Tolstoy quote. Predictably, the woman physician (cardiologist) who had formulated the policy of prophylactic antibiotics for heart problem patients with oral "surgery", immediately came out with her own statement that the heart association was not going to change its recommendations. Of course, this would totally refute her one claim to fame. Can anyone be surprised that she is opposed to the new set of facts? The heart association let her be their spokesman for this subject.
Now, since the antibiotics do no good at all, the only thing they can do is subject the patient to their risks----besides all the things about overuse of antibiotics.
Once again, the welfare of the profession comes WAY ahead of the welfare of the patient.
I appreciate the question since it gives me a chance to announce this new finding AND to remind people how these things work in a medical monopoly.
Walt
Follow Ups:
Re: mvp (addendum--antibiotics no longer recommended with dental procedures in heart patients)
Posted by Sara on December 03, 1998 at 00:54:50:
In Reply to: Re: mvp (addendum--antibiotics no longer recommended with dental procedures in heart patients) posted by Walt Stoll on December 02, 1998 at 12:05:15:
Walt,
Does this also hold true for someone who has had valve surgery? My husband had his mitral valve surgically repaired last January. Although they did not replace the valve, they did insert some kind of metal ring in doing the repair. He is not on blood thinners or any kind of heart medication; however, they are still recommending antibiotics before any dental procedure, because of the metal ring. I worry about this frequent use of antibiotics (especially if it isn't necessary).
Sara
Follow Ups:
Re: mvp (addendum--antibiotics no longer recommended with dental procedures in heart patients)
Posted by Walt Stoll on December 04, 1998 at 09:39:37:
In Reply to: Re: mvp (addendum--antibiotics no longer recommended with dental procedures in heart patients) posted by Sara on December 03, 1998 at 00:54:50:
Dear Sara,
I do not know. I got the information second hand from National Public Radio within the past week. As I recall, it was published in either the New England Journal of Medicine or the Journal of the AMA. You would do best to read the article. I would be surprised if the Journal of the American Heart Association did not have an editorial blasting it. They always blast anything that has not been practiced for 50 years and especially anything that is not financially advantageous to the cardiologist or cardiac surgeon.
The have done the same to the Pritikin Program for Reversing Heart Disease for at least 40 years and Chelation Therapy for at least 40 years. Even the idea of hyperhomocysteinemia being related to atherosclerosis----
especially since the solution was B vitamin therapy above the RDA. Now, all of these are considered valid.
Of course coronary bypass surgery was immediately accepted without even one double-blind study having been done. I wonder why?
I would suggest his continuing with what his cardiologist says for now. I am sure his cardiologist is aware of the study. Until you have enough information (Which you may have to ferret out on your own------------depending on the intellectual honesty of his doc.) you need to take the word of those in direct contact with his care.
If I had his problem, I would do what is necessary to read the article myself AND, if needed, call the authors for a direct question.
Let us know what you learn.
Good Question! Walt