Lares Research - Laser Dentistry Forum

This topic is empty.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 37 total)

← 1 2 3 →

Author

Posts
October 7, 2005 at 10:57 pm #8501 Reply

Robert Gregg DDS
Spectator

OK Don, let’s “talk”,

You have made a representation about ALD “policy”. That doesn’t change history.
The history is that our customers who went through Standard Proficiency when MDT/IALD had provisional acceptance were told by ALD staff that their SP from us was not recognized. That is a FACT. Your truth is somehow different.

You can describe events and history described to you as “disgusting” and point and wag your finger, but that doesn’t change history.

Loudly delcaring your “truth” vs my “facts” doesn’t make you right or righteous.

It’s good to have transparency and disclosure from the ALD folks–good on you all. That’s what we all want from you.

Care to address my Charter Membership matter now? Is that also one of the “disgusting” allegations that I made?

The opinion of ALD that I shared is not an opinion of one. Just someone who has the gall to say it publically.

Cheers,

Bob

October 7, 2005 at 11:30 pm #8478 Reply

Don Coluzzi
Spectator

Hi Bob: This will be quick(er) than the last ones. Whatever historical facts you have, I’m trying to tell you that they are not true. You’ve seen the current policy, which is only a refinement of the previous policy that you’ve known about. Your customers were apparently misled, or didn’t hear things clearly. I’m not sure we’re communicating at all here, but I’m still sticking to what I know is and was ALD policy; it’s now been posted, and so please tell your customers the correct thing. Please don’t keep harping on money (which is false) and confusing and arbitrary policies (which is also false.) What’s up with your charter membership? I really don’t know–if you’re not a member anymore, and clearly don’t like the organization, why are you hanging on to that? I’ll always think of you as one of the founders, but if you don’t choose to actively participate, you can’t contribute to the organization.
Yes, I’m sure there are many opinions about ALD. I’ve heard a few dissenters, but I’m concentrating on the active membership. You can do as you please, just don’t keep telling me about the history that you keep saying is true. There is such a thing as false history, and your previous comments add to that falsehood. Again, I’ll try to keep you informed of any information I receive about things like CDA and ALD mis-speak.
Let’s concentrate on the present and future of the wonderful world of lasers in dentistry………DON

October 8, 2005 at 1:24 am #8502 Reply

Robert Gregg DDS
Spectator

Don–

I am not wrong about the truth or the facts that MDT customers were told.

I know what our customers were told and I intervened and discussed with Gail, Janet Rice and Steven Parker at the time.

The denial of our SP recognition to our customers trying to qualify for AP was a true and factual event.

My Charter Membership status? Why am I, “hanging on to that” you ask? I am answering your challenges about arbitrary behavior.

It’s an example of arbitrary behavior in an organization–whether codified in the written policies or not–is beside the point. Declaring a Charter Member a “Member” on one’s name tag at annual meetings is wrong to such a member. And I am far from the only one.

I did not write the things I wrote in these posts regarding the ALD to be an exhaustive disclosure of all things disappointing about ALD. I mention only those things that were and have been done to our company, our customers and to me and Del personally that were arbitrary and unfair–and within the context of others who have had relevant and comparable issues to deal with.

That fact that you as a Board member of the ALD find those truths of accurate history unpalatable and distasteful is part of the problem.

These matters were NEVER adequately addressed at the time, they are among the reasons we resigned, and your discomfort with them isn’t going to change the fact they should have and still ought to be acknowledged or addressed.

That’s not anger you are reading–it’s a protest for accountability.

As far as AGD goes–I know what happened in that instance. I’m not “wrong” about that matter either.

Don, it’s way too convenient to dismiss the disappointed, the disenfranchised and the “non-members” and delcare that, “it’s time to move on” when wrongs have been committed and people have been hurt. There comes a time when self-examination, an airing of grievances, and corrective actions is a good thing for people and organizations.

If you are going to look into the CDA affair, then I suggest you don’t stop there.

I look forward to your report.

Take care,

Bob

October 8, 2005 at 3:46 am #8479 Reply

Don Coluzzi
Spectator

Bob: We’re not at all communicating here. You keep saying you know things, keep referring to things not being addressed or resolved, but I’ve been trying to point out the policies that I know you know about because you used to be very active. I didn’t say you were wrong about AGD; but I do know that nobody has been denied an Advanced Proficiency application as long as that person has a recognized Standard Certificate. I’m sure that’s what you were told in your discussion with Gail, Janet Rice and Steven Parker. I’m tired of saying the same thing over and over again to you about ALD recognized Standard Profieciency. My original post was to help Dr. Davis who was disappointed and perhaps disenfranchised, not to dismiss him. Since we seem to both have different versions of the facts, I can only say please be careful with what you proclaim about the ALD. I’m done with this, and you won’t hear from me again………….DON

October 8, 2005 at 3:25 pm #8496 Reply

Robert Gregg DDS
Spectator

Good Morning Don,

You say we aren’t “communicating” because I’m not saying what you want to hear.

You have been arguing about general policies in the abstract.

MDT has a paper trail and we can produce names, dates, receipts, SP certificates, receipts and records of duplicate SP from ALD.

You have consistently challenged my facts and historical representation and saying they are not true–and w/o evidence to support your position. I have evidence to back up my statements. What do you have outside the abstract application of policies that you assert is how those polices are actually applied?

Sorry, Don, I’m not gonna let you get away with misrepresenting the evidence, and if I have to scan documents and upload and post them on this forum I will.

Your “intangible” vs my “tangible”. Your assertion vs my evidence.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you respect evidence over anecdote……..right Don?

You want to refocus the conversation back to Dr. Chris Davis’s incident? Great! That’s another example of confusion, distortion, misapplication or arbitrary (you can chose whatever word you dislike the least) application of ALD policy. And Dr. Davis’s matter is no more in the abstract that MDT’s customers of the past that you loudly decry as “false”.

The issue is now that there is a public discussion about Dr. Davis’s problem, it has been acknowledged here by you–a representative of the ALD Board– in this Forum. This “official” acknowledgement, however belated, is something that he apparently was not able to achieve through normal ALD channels.:(

That’s the issue. Marginalizing the membership which results in duplication of costs to members who took courses in good faith only to be later denied by misapplication of ALD policy. This duplication of cost means more money to ALD in the form of certification fees……..There’s the money aspect.

But when I report our example of customers similarly disenfranchised in years gone by (before there was a public forum) you want to dismiss me and our complaint as old history. Worse, you impune my integrity by saying that the events didn’t happen and are “false”. That’s not nice when there’s nothing but the abstract of “policy” to back up your accusation.

That’s the sort of dismissive attitude that led Del, me and MDT to resign from ALD. And I am glad it is all on display here for all to see.

It would be nice if you took the same interest in past disenfranchisement’s of our customers and ALD members (at the time) as you have stated interest in MDT disenfranchisement from AGD and the CDA Laser Workshops hosted or sponsored by ALD or others closely associated with ALD–you, Joel and Peter.

Don’t get angry with the messenger, deal with the message. And don’t blame the “victim” and accuse them of false reporting–it results in double victimization. It is not becoming of an organization’s leadership.

I see that Dr. Steven Parker, current President of ALD has logged in today. Welcome Steve. I’m interested in what Steve would have to say–usually more eloquently that I can.

As ALD President, Steven has the power of the ALD Constitution and By-Laws to led, influence and direct the Board and the staff to see that policies are in fact followed, and that people and groups aren’t disenfranchised.

And if I have done nothing more in my original and subsequent posts than to help a laser dentist like Dr. Davis and his problems with ALD (and laser dentistry in general), then my comments that have inflamed you so have had the desired result.

I unfortunately know dozens of laser dentists in my 15 plus years of laser dentistry who have quit the practice of laser dentistry altogether and gone on to other things like denture clinics and implants–numerous names I could mention and you might know. Laser dentistry doesn’t need an organization with policy applications that frustrate its membership or non-member laser clinicians.

How else can the ALD expect to grow if its shortcomings are not addressed?

This has been a good point-counterpoint for outsiders to see some of the issues that cause frustration. Sorry, Don, you now feel it’s time to dismiss yourself from it.

Yours in the best interest of laser dentistry,

Bob

(Edited by Robert Gregg DDS at 2:16 pm on Oct. 8, 2005)

October 9, 2005 at 5:31 pm #8484 Reply

Dr S Parker
Spectator

Dear Bob,
Like a trout to a fly, you knew that the mention of my name would get me to write!
I enjoy a distinct privilege, being locked away in the laser wilderness that is the UK, yet I care deeply for the perceived attempts at self-destruction that I witness of the US laser market.
My perspective of historical events is clear (to me at least). The Academy has, historically, been held to ransome by some who have sought to see it as some kind of “gravy train”. Through the many allegations of “old boy-ism”, with which I readily associate, the Academy has sought to define a line of objectiveness and transparency. To date, I fear, we may have failed to convince many and my reading of the postings causes me concern, Bob, in that you are very angry and upset.
My greater concern is that, whatever the quarrel, whatever the cause, the major victim is the honest, innovative dentist who is only trying to expand his or her practice into laser dentistry. Their shock, when they realise that they are “duped” by the “big business” that our small world has been consumed by, is a sad statement of affairs.
Much of what has been said, has been said in truth – you, Don, Mike have all stated facts that have a basis in truth. What is sad, is that truth is the weapon of the believer and, yet, who is to believe?
My present position, held with great honour and a desire for collectivity, gives me a perview of what a shambles we all have made of our responsibility to our fellow pofessionals. “Big brother” is looming, to curtail our expansive ambitions, through regulation, outwardly to protect, but inevitably to stifle and suppress. Were I to take my multiple wavelength Advanced Proficiencies, gained through the Academy, to the WCLI and seek reciprocity, I would be laughed at. What is so different, if the converse should occur? And what should that honest innovative dentist make of this situation?
My greatest fear is that, through all this anger, the wider circle of respected laser dentist pioneers, such as and including you and Del, suffers the defragmentation that all this bitterness will surely cause. Surely, at this time of looming regulation in the use of lasers, we should seek to work together to provide a strong, decisive and uniform message to every dental professional who cares to join our throng.
You, Del and your respected company is welcome within Academy circles whilst I’m President. This is not a snub to my close friend Don, because I would hope that you would show me the professional respect that I extend to you in making such a statement, by hoping and striving for a more balanced and honorable representation of lasers to our uninformed colleagues.
As President of the Academy, I could say “go stuff yourself” and repeat that to every company or individual that has sought to question the Academy and it’s high moral values. Except that, the Academy deserves no moral high-ground, nor should we all forget our privilege in representing a wonderful branch of dentistry to our wider profession. My only assertion on behalf of the Academy, is that, despite all the allegations, the criticisms and bad feeling, during my “watch”, I will do my best to try and bring everyone towards a better level of understanding. That way, our honest innovative dentist can feel confident that he is amongst fellow professionals and each and every patient receives safe, responsible and caring laser dentistry.
We Brits are very good at the soft-talking “s**t”. I doubt if I have answered barely a single allegation or question. What I can offer is to take up any concern that you may have and seek to view it objectively. The Academy is a wonderful organisation – why the Hell would this stupid Brit have spent 13 years travelling 3-4 times a year to the US? The Academy could and should be better with people like you on the inside and you should endeavour to work with us. Otherwise the saying “keep your friends close – and your enemies even closer!” might apply!.
I thought all the “pioneers” got shot by the Indians – let’s not get to the point where we shoot each other! Kind regards, Steven

October 10, 2005 at 3:02 pm #8497 Reply

Robert Gregg DDS
Spectator

Dear Steven,

Bravo! Well said! Now that’s the way to answer criticism and disappointment from people disenfranchised! By the way, your English is really coming along quite nicely.;)

Written text alone often fails to convey accurate meaning and context. As I said earlier–Del and I are not “angry”–but we are disillusioned and disappointed in what has taken place in ALD both while we were members (and I was on the Board) and what happened to our customers, as well as what has transpired since.

It is all too common when persons are disenfranchised from an organization to be labeled any number of unattractive names, and for organizational insiders to dismiss and marginalizes the critics with unflattering descriptions.

My references to ALD were admittedly inflammatory–non mean-spirited. That doesn’t mean there isn’t truth in those descriptions that the recipients might be better off addressing and not dismissing or denying. What I related was a point of view, a perspective–as you said so eloquently, “our truth”. It may sound ugly, disgusting and harsh to the object of the criticism, but there’s the opportunity to make remedies if possible.

You, for one–and an important “one” as ALD President–have opened the door.

All should know that no one has been more dedicated to the ALD than you have. I’ve personally and privately complimented you on that before. That you would travel from the UK as often as you have in your 13 years to attend quarterly Board meetings and annual sessions has been remarkable dedication. People who live closer and are no more busy than you would often not show up at Board meetings–including myself. You have my admiration and respect.

I agree with you on the larger point that you make: The regulatory laser landscape in a number of States suggests organized laser dentistry and the laser industry of manufacturers at large has given ground on policing our own arena.

Back in 1999, we warned and advised some of our ALD Board friends that marginalizing MDT/IALD and/or WCLI was not in the best interests of laser dentistry. We advised that these manufacturer sponsored “institutes” would be a force to be reckoned with. We were not given serous considerations–just “provisional” recognition of our course…….and ALD has watched WCLI lay claim to 4000 members that could have been ALD’s.

MDT was the first and still remains today the only manufacturer that requires 3 days of didactic and clinical hands-on training as a condition of purchase and completion of SP according to the Curriculum Guidelines for Dental Laser Education. Our course curriculums and content are transparent to all who ask. As a result, we are so far, the only company that has had its training program recognized in states that have enacted or considering enaction of dental laser regulations.

Millennium Dental Technologies once purchased ALD membershp for each MDT customer. MDT was the first laser manufacturer do buy an ALD membership in the name of each new customer. Other companies later followed our lead. Unfortunately, as a result of our disenfranchisement from ALD, MDT no longer purchases an ALD membership for our customers. MDT stopped that back in 1999 when we were the single largest source of new members for a short time before our resignaton.

While you didn’t address any specifics of several issues raised. Perhaps there is now an opportunity to do so.

We look forward to the transparency of your term of office.

Respectfully,

Bob

October 10, 2005 at 6:01 pm #8485 Reply

Dr S Parker
Spectator

Dear Bob,
Thank you for your response and your kind words. I am happy to pursue this discussion in open forum, mainly because it is to the new, “innocent” laser dentist that any hope of consensus must be directed. That aside, I am travelling to Chicago this week-end for an ALD Board meeting and I would really like to address much of your frustrations as part of a “healing” period.
Please feel free to call me at +44-1423-874064, between 5.00 and 6.00pm GMT, should you wish to speak about the problems before I leave on Friday. Alternatively, I’ll keep in touch with the forum, if you would prefer to list the problems in bullet form.
Central to any progress in these matters is for everyone involved to step back to the days when we were all “freshmen” in the world of laser dentistry. We were all fair-game for the smooth-talking salesperson, or, moreso the high-ranking presenter. What is pertinent to the current fiasco, is that there is no commonality in the levels of certification being offered by individual organisations / manufacturers and, as yet, no reciprocity. I would be misled if I didn’t think that there are those reading this correspondence who didn’t come from one of the many “certifying” bodies that bedecks the laser market; consequently, I would urge us all to seek some recourse whereby the unsuspecting newcomer can feel confident that their hard-earned qualification is meaningful across the board.
Bob, I judge that your “marginalisation” from the Academy is within redeemable limits. I hope that there is some way in which the huge, if at present diverse, body of opinion within laser dentistry, can be utilised positively to the benefit of us all. Kind regards, Steven

October 10, 2005 at 10:30 pm #8507 Reply

cadavis
Spectator

First, allow me to appologize. To call the ALD “f***ed-up” was unprofessional. That came out of frustration. I’m sure the ALD is trying its best to come up with standardization for proficiency, and I think that is important. I doubt seriously that the Opus people purposely tried to decieve anyone concerning the ALD proficiency. The ALD seal of approval, that was left on their binders, was most likely an oversight.
My main concern right now is my lack of training and preparation for using the laser. I’m very excited about it and look forward to becoming proficient, but I have the feeling there will be an extremely steep learning curve. The ALD has recently assisted me by locating a more experienced laser dentist who has volunteered to help me out. Opus on the other hand is out of the picture I guess. Haven’t heard from them in a while. I’m not so diluted that I don’t understand why, after all, the sale is complete. That’s life!!
I’ve registered for the annual ALD symposium is March ’06, and will get my Standard Proficiency at that time (for real this time).
I appreciate the help that all of the doctors on this website have provided and look forward to learning more from you.

Thanks again.
Chris Davis

October 11, 2005 at 2:27 pm #8475 Reply

whitertth
Spectator

I read with great interest everyones posts and I feel I would like to chime in a few words, relevant or not.
Having attended my first ALD meeting last year in New Orleans I need to relate my experience so when Dr Parker goes to the board, you can relate my feelings which I think are felt by many.
I was asked by a few people at the meeting, why this was my first ALD meeting, since I have been using Lasers back from 1989 while in Dental school.
I feel my answer is important and critical to the perception felt by many about the ALD.
My answer was I was always told it was a good ole boys club so I never went. But in 2005 I said to myself why not go check it out, and see what happens. I was honored to be selected to present my clinical case of treating Pemphigoid with the YSGG wavelength, and a few days in New Orleans would be fun.
I will say that from the start Estrella was very accomodating, and welcoming in everything that I needed. I took the standard proficiency as well and will relate my experience about that in a second.
I presented my work and my feeling was that it was well received. Don,( Stu Coleton), Arun, and one or two others, acknoledged my work to me personally, something even for me who has been around for a while, someone who lectures all over the place, felt “Good”. After this point it was all downhill for the me and the ALD. Obviously attendees have friends from past meeting but if you were a newer memeber or attendee you never really felt at home, this being a place where the ALD fails tremendously, and a place where this group has excelled.
Many of us, here have become good friends from learning, bantering, exchanging from each other, regardless of wavelegnth, company affiliation etc….We have realized this is a forum for learning and friendships have spouted from it. The ALD needs to do that in my opinion to succeed and survive.
As far as the Standard proficiency course I must say it was a BIG WASTE OF TIME….Questions predominantly based on CO and argon wavelengths, with little to no questions on newer technology such as erbium yag, YSGG and diodes( not so new in my opinion). The exam and course should be based on those as well the ND yag with liitle to nothing on the other wavelengths as they are only relevant to us in a minor capacity in dentistry. I can only asume that the other wavelengths were not taught much because the instructors have little to no clue what is relevant today in dentistry. Dr Rashkoff( I know i am not spelling it right) bascially told me himself he hasnt used the YSGG much yet he is teaching a standard proficiency course…Come on…that is ridiculous…THE SP COURSE NEEDS TO CHANGE OTHERWISE IT IS A WASTE OF TIME AND AN EMBARRASSMENT TO CLINICAL LASER DENTISTRY.
Finaly, In my opinion, the meeting itself will not ever be well attended without more reference to clinical dentistry both in presentations and abstracts. Most of us practice while fewer of us are in a university setting. I for one will not attend any more ALD meeting because it has no relevance to me unless things change.
I am sorry for the ramble and I hope this makes a difference since all of us here are passionate and believe in clinical laser dentistry.
Respectfully,
Ron

(Edited by whitertth at 10:44 am on Oct. 11, 2005)

(Edited by whitertth at 10:49 am on Oct. 11, 2005)

(Edited by whitertth at 10:52 am on Oct. 11, 2005)

October 11, 2005 at 5:14 pm #8482 Reply

Dr S Parker
Spectator

Dear Dr Kaminer,
I am grateful for this frank exchange of views, which is refreshing to hear, but sad to witness.
I betray no confidence by expressing my agreement with you over the course content of the Standard course. The specifics of your comments could be addressed by the progress made in the Recognised Course Provider requirements that were finalised in New Orleans and, as such overlap your experience of the lecture content.
I believe that the possible majority of powerpoint slides in circulation at many venues differ little from those that you may have seen in New Orleans. It is the responsibility of those who enjoy the privilege of presenting these courses, that they should be up to date and familiar with all aspects of laser use in dentistry. It is of little consequence, or consolation, that Academy-recognised courses are essentially non-device specific, in that they should cover all laser wavelengths; with this in mind, it makes your experience all the more laughable. I shall take a keen interest in ensuring some improvements for the future, to address the faults that you itemise.
By way of soliciting your interest, the next two issues of the Academy journal contain a deal of clinical work, using both Er:YAG and YSGG. I do hope that you will allow yourself to enjoy the read!
Please be assured that the Academy is undergoing a radical shift in polarity during this and subsequent years. Firstly, there is a desire to greatly enhance the certification protocols at both Standard and Advanced level and, secondly, there is a profound wish to remove the shackles of the “old boy” epithet.
I am sorry and frustrated by your experience in New Orleans – interestingly, neither the conference nor the venue are open to reinactment at this time!
With your consent, I shall report my experience at this forum during the past week to the ALD Board. It has certainly been illuminating for me to field the understandable concerns and frustrations that I have encountered. I hope that you might continue your support of the Academy and witness our attempts to improve the service delivered to each member. Kind regards, Steven

October 11, 2005 at 5:38 pm #8476 Reply

whitertth
Spectator

Dear Steven,
Thank you for understanding of the ALD newbie’s plight…I was excited to come to that meeting but left somewhat dissapointed…I am not dropping my support of the academy as I belive in laser educatiion and hope to see the changes the academy needs to progress in the field of laser dentistry. Please share my comments and thought and if anyone would like to contact me personally I would be happy to speak to them…Again thank you for listening.
Warmest regards,
Ron

October 12, 2005 at 1:55 am #8504 Reply

Swpmn
Spectator

Thank you very much Drs. Coluzzi and Parker for providing feedback regarding our concerns.

Allen

October 12, 2005 at 6:16 am #8492 Reply

Glenn van As
Spectator

Hi folks……..as a member of the ALD and also as a member of the LDF here I see the value in both. The ALD does serve to provide a basic level of education and safety regardless of brand of laser to the new user. It acts as a “watch dog” for all of laser dentistry.

With that in mind there has been an eruption of new wavelengths and newer products over the last 10 years and still some of the “good ol boys” still own NdYAG and CO2 and they are the ones running the ship.

The popularity of the WCLI for Biolase users is that it is primarily a forum for clinical cases with little emphasis on science, education, SAFETY, and other issues that are so prevalent at the ALD.

I for one think that there is a happy medium where science, education and laser physics can be intermixed with clinical cases.

I have mentioned in the past to some at the ALD (of which I have attended the last 5 I think) that I felt more input from clinicians was needed.

It may be time to have two tracks at future meetings. One that emphasizes research, laser physics, and laser science with safety, and one that emphasizes clinical cases . I know some that are Er,Cr:YSGG would maybe be interested in some of the science specific to that wavelength, or clinical cases specific to that wavelength.

In addition breakout sessions sponsored by the companies in the afternoon would allow users of that wavelength to concentrate at least 2/3 to 3/4 of their time on that wavelength and encourage speakers for the companies to come to the meeting and learn a bit about other wavelengths that are out there.

This gets rid of the my laser is better than yours phenomena that was so predominant especially in the erbium family just a few shorts years ago.

In closing, I want to compliment Steven Parker as president for coming online to take the time to address issues that members of the LDF have posted regarding the standard proficiency. It shows a caring attitude to trying to alleviate concerns over the direction that the ALD is heading and also shows how 1000 members + here on the board can influence, and educate the laser world to what is happening out there.

Steven , I encourage you to look at the past posts on LDF here to see what a great group of clinicians that there is here. So much information has passed on here since I joined over 3 years ago. I have learned so much from so many here and gained alot of friendships. This board has had very few negative battles unlike some other forums on the web dealing with lasers. There is an honest to goodness desire from the MANY committed clinicians here at LDF to learn as much about lasers as possible and I think that many here are leaders in their chosen wavelengths in the field.

It is wonderful that you have come here to help attenuate concerns and to listen. It speaks volumes about you as a president and the direction the ALD is going.

I for one will be in Tucson this year and encourage others to make a difference to what the ALD becomes. Its easy to criticize from the box seats, but harder to be part of the game………

Steven has come to play, now I hope others show similar intent and will show there.

Heck even if its to sample another Restaraunt that Ron Kaminer can pick out.

That was one of the highlights for me!!

All the best and thanks again to everyone for caring enough to post on this topic. In the end all the passionate clinicians here win!!

Cya

Glenn

October 12, 2005 at 12:29 pm #8477 Reply

whitertth
Spectator

OK OK Glen, here is the deal, if they include some clinical tracks…I will come to Tuscon, and pick out a restaurant and will invite Dr. Parker to join us. Dr. Parker my reputation precedes me and I make a real good reservation..
All the best..
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 37 total)

← 1 2 3 →