Hi doc! When you say you haven’t placed cord or used laser in a long time, what do you use instead if your preps are all mostly equi or sub gingival? Thanks
Please note that what you are pointing out at 1:40 is the inferior turbinate and not the sinus; an ENT for nasal endoscopy should be the first choice for complementary information. Best regards!
Please don't insult our inteligence by trying to justify your outrageous unethical practices and rates! You could still make a profit without ripping off vulnerable patients. What do you have to say about this? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Z0XsjNWlCuM.htmlsi=H-cdDOEqF8HvMVgc
Hello just a question about your current setup. What do you use now to record cases? Are you still using the go pro. Also did you add any lenses on the go pro. How do you manage with the battery life
For anyone watching dealing with this, the deep clean will be partially covered (at least was by my insurance). However, be prepared for a mountainous amount of bs when you go back for the followup polish. The place I was going for years charged me close to $300 bucks for a simple polish saying I was no longer a "regular" patient, but guess what I've had many polishes in my lifetime, and it was precisely the same. My advice, do through research before choosing a speacalist, and have in depth talks about money, bc once it's done, there's no wiggle room. The dentist office has turned into a racket, not all, but lots of them dont truly care about their patients anymore, they only care about the toys they can buy through recommending expensive stuff to you. Like I said, not all. My dentist recommended replacing all my bottom teeth with porcelain crowns, just to match some veneers I had put on top. Why, as a specialist would you not be trying to preserve and protect my original teeth? Tell you why, bc it would be 20k.
If we are using a same day solution like CEREC or Glidewell fast mill then they usually are still numb enough to proceed with the bonding without addition additional anesthetic. Often times they will require some more anesthetic though.
The short answer is "it depends." Depending on what setting you have the machine on, and how frequently you take an xray this will determine the risk. Radiation is radiation. It is additive and dangerous even in small amounts. We need to be cognizant of that and make sure we are exposing our patients to the lowest amount of radiation possible. These machines have a much lower exposure than a medical CT machine, much much lower than a chest xray from an old film type machine, but there is still radiation to account for.
@@davekingdds I also know someone who gets 2 CT scans a year because they have chrohns disease and have for many many years and are fine so idk I feel like a lot of information on radiation is all over the place. From what I’ve seen an accumulation of less then 100msv in one sitting is considered safe then I’ve seen reports say 50 msv is safe for the whole year lol
"A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage" ... "Show me," you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle - but no dragon. "Where's the dragon?" you ask. "Oh, she's right here," I reply, waving vaguely. "I neglected to mention that she's an invisible dragon." You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon's footprints. "Good idea," I say, "but this dragon floats in the air." Then you'll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire. "Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless." You'll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible. "Good idea, but she's an incorporeal dragon and the paint won't stick." And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won't work. Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so. The only thing you've really learned from my insistence that there's a dragon in my garage is that something funny is going on inside my head." -- Carl Sagan. The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark
@@davekingdds We have valid, objective, positive evidence and logic showing that the Sun and gravity exists. We don't have that for your God. Your God has as much valid, objective, positive evidence supporting its existence as does Sagan's invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire ... none.
King Nabonidus of Babylon, through faith, believed the moon god Sin existed and should be worshiped above the other gods. At the same time, most of the people of Babylon were angry with Nabonidus because they believed, through faith, that Marduk not only existed but was the greatest of all the gods. The Assyrians, through faith, believed that the god Ashur (Assur) existed and was the greatest of the gods. The earlier Sumerians, through faith, believed in the sun god Shamash, as well as many other gods, such as Enlil and Enki. The ancient Egyptians, with only faith as a guide, believed in the gods Horus, Ptah, Re, and others. The Persians believed, through faith, that Ahura Mazda was the supreme god. And so on and so on. As a monotheist, you believe the faith of all those other religions - both those still practiced today and those long forgotten - is useless and wrong. So you are forced to conclude that faith is arbitrary, subjective, and unreliable, and that having faith something is true is completely useless in demonstrating, or even knowing, that it actually is true. And, of course, the members of all those other incompatible religions - today's and those throughout all history - would say your faith is wrong and useless in knowing the truth (and that your faith has misled you, leading you away from the true God(s)). Could you demonstrate that they would be wrong? No. Because your faith - like all religious faith - is purely subjective and baseless; it is not grounded in solid evidence and reasoning, nor is it grounded by either alone - quite the opposite, actually: it is based on gullibility and irrationality, and possibly some fear and false hope mixed in.
This is commonly the result of an undermill in the milling process. Sometimes you'll have to go and over finish (meaning grinding the surface down with a fine diamond) the abutment before the crown seats on it all the way. There may be a setting that will allow you to increase the cement spacer in between the abutment, and the crown, this will enable you to seat the crown on the abutment a little more easily.
They were socialized as puppies with the chickens. We had shock collars and would buzz them when they began to chase or rattle the chickens. It only took a few days of close watching to train them.
Beautiful truck I have a 2020 colorado z71 4x4 crew cab 36000 miles and had my front air dam trimmed at dealership bodyshop for 80 bucks now don't have to take it off when four wheeling
“FAITH. No one word personifies the absolute worst and most wicked properties of religion better than that. Faith is mind-rot. It’s the poison that destroys critical thinking, undermines evidence, and leads people into lives dedicated to absurdity. It’s a parasite regarded as a virtue.” - PZ Myers
That's an interesting take on faith. My perspective is somewhat different. To me, faith is something that is developed and matured, not something that is coerced or poisonous. It is something that takes cautious preparation, careful experimentation, and thoughtful preservation. Perhaps referring to different concepts. My idea of faith is that it is an ability that is fostered over time from careful personal choice and accountability, not mind control from above that forces blind following. Much like the relationship of wisdom to knowledge, faith is to belief; something that requires the other, but is much more and requires effort, time, and sacrifice.
@@davekingdds You just threw together good-sounding concepts, that have nothing to do with faith. "Blindly believing in an all-powerful, all-knowing, invisible, immortal, eternal sky wizard is mind-rot: it's the poison that destroys critical thinking, undermines evidence, and leads people into lives dedicated to absurdity. It's a parasite regarded as a virtue." That makes sense. Your silly flowery description does not.
@@TonyTigerTonyTiger respectfully, I disagree. I’m creating a video that’ll give you a little more context and some of my thoughts about faith. There’s nothing blind about true faith and belief.
@@davekingdds Of course you disagree. You don't want to look like a fool for blindly believing in invisible, immortal, eternal sky beings who magically poof things into existence, and who can exist, think, and act all in the absolute absence of time, space, matter, and energy, and for which there isn't a shred of good evidence for their existence. You want to make what you do sound good, even though it is bad.
@@davekingdds BILL: Hey Tommy, did I tell you about my good friend, who I have a personal relationship with, who is all-powerful, all-knowing, invisible, immortal, and lives in the sky ... and that he existed, thought, and acted, all in the total absence of energy, matter, time, and space? TOMMY: Wow, those are some astronomically extraordinary claims. For example, everything we know from common sense, objective experience, logic, and science, tells us it is literally impossible for a being to exist, or to think, or to act, in the absolute absence of space, time, matter, and energy. So any rational person would require an astronomical amount of extraordinary evidence before they would even entertain believing those claims. So what is your good evidence supporting them? BILL: I have none. You just have to have faith and blindly believe fantastical claims about impossible, invisible, magical beings, for which there isn't any good evidence at all. Oh, and you need to devote your life to this being. The world would be a much better place if people tossed their brains out the window and blindly believed. TOMMY: Wow, that sounds like mind-rot. Like a metaphorical poison that destroys critical thinking, undermines evidence, and leads you into a life dedicated to absurdities. It sounds like a proverbial parasite, but you act like it is a virtue.
Aside from installing an oil catch can, I would recommend removing the intercooler afterward and cleaning it out very well with brake cleaner or gumout, and cleaning your intake chute and sensors on the intake after the intercooler to get the oil film off them.
Totally agree, no need for 1.000.000 MPA when millions of years of evolution led to 160MPA - The key is good Planning - preps - occlusion - bonding. We have Empress CAD Posteriors 10 years and counting... Zirconia makes up for bad dentistry. People get away with bad preps, occlusion.
Is this shuttering just feel like the engine shakes every now and then? Mine has 170k and when I got it it kinda shook more before catch can and oil change. But I still feel it a tiny bit
