A Response to My Critic

In his latest bid to undermine the common sense approaches I discuss to eliminate the documented negative aspects of rotary NiTi, my critic on LinkedIn has brought up posts from years ago that were posted on DT. At the time of my participation, rotary was becoming increasingly popular and the general consensus was that this form of instrumentation was the wave of the future. I participated in discussions regarding instrumentation techniques and then as now I was a supporter of an oscillating approach as opposed to rotary for all the reasons that I have stated in posts published here. Unlike LinkedIn, the environment on DT was a contentious one and civil discussions suffered often losing out to emotional outbursts. Frankly, to inhabit that environment was exhausting and counterproductive.?

He brings up responses from various?DT members who stated that oscillation like every other systems suffers as many separations as rotary and the claims I make for 30o oscillations of stainless steel relieved reamers are false. Let’s look at the support he makes for those claims. He cannot go to the literature and find articles that discuss separation as it relates to 30o oscillations because they don’t exist. And the reason they don’t exist is because research focuses on clinical problems that have become apparent to practitioners. On the other hand, he cannot deny that innumerable articles have been written about rotary separation, their causes and steps needed for prevention, ineffective three dimensional debridement as well as their potentially damaging impact on the canal walls.?

Rather than dealing with rotary’s shortcomings, he finds it more productive to disparage the mechanical advantages that oscillation provides and his method of disparagement is impuning my character and the basis for his disparagement is the fact that I have a vested interest in advocating the techniques we introduced. Well, I can’t deny that my partner and I started a company over 40 years ago to improve endodontic procedures where we thought we had some insights. What I can say is that I am still an actively practicing endodontist and my main impetus for developing these products was to make my own life safer and more comfortable. So, if I am guilty it is in believing that others might benefit from some of the innovations we initially created for ourselves.

With another statement by some individual from years ago, he suggests that I am not asked to lecture because of my ineffective and invalid content. This year I am giving two three hour lectures at the Greater New York Dental Meeting and if it were not for Covid I would have had more venues where I was asked to speak.?

Now, under the circumstances that he has created, it is a reasonable exercise to question his motivations to be so antagonistic to what I write about. He runs a post graduate endodontic program. I know little about it, but I do know from creating the endodontic department in one dental school that the major manufacturers are eager to support any of these programs if and it is a big if the students use the products that the companies sell. It is an excellent investment. They support the students with reduced prices for a couple of years and it is likely that many of the students upon graduation will become lifelong consumers of their products at full cost. Any director of a program needs their support and is grateful for it. He also notes that he has no financial interest in these endeavors, but does state that he receives honorariums when he lectures. That is all fine and good and more success for him, but he is not asked to lecture critically regarding the products that the company produces and is paying him to promote. From my perspective, if a company is paying you to speak you do have a vested interest.

I hesitated in writing this form of post. I find it distasteful and runs against my instincts of fair and open debate as a worthy goal in itself. Nevertheless, there comes a point where a thought out rational response is called for. I am not looking to escalate emotions or to amuse anyone who might find personal?conflict entertaining. Going forward there is much to discuss in endodontics and it will be far more productive if we eliminate assessments on one’s character.

Regards, Barry