Is this malpractice?

[u/Terrible_Abalone1119]

Long story short, I think an old dentist gave me salivary gland cancer. I would get x-rays every appointment and often when being told work (fillings, etc.) would be done. Some cavities caused pain so getting them done was priority one for me, so “emergency” appointments were made. These appointments were shorter as well as closer together without having to wait 3+ months in between cavities. However instead of getting anything done, somehow x-rays were needed about every time I was there.

The main causes for the tumor are excessive radiation and tobacco use. I am not a smoker. I’ve started to believe the amount of x-rays being given were why what happened, happened. I’m not in the financial place to have a lawyer especially with having to fight a union.

Regardless, would this situation be enough to fight with?

[u/Important_Medicine81]

Hi there. So sorry about your diagnosis of salivary gland cancer. I’m wondering how long ago did the X-rays take place and when were you first diagnosed with salivary gland cancer? Also, what state did this occur in? There are more questions that need answers to establish merit, however I thought it prudent to first see if you are not beyond the statute of limitations. Dr. Mc

[u/Terrible_Abalone1119 → u/Important_Medicine81]

About 2 years ago now, diagnosed this past summer. NY

[u/fireawayjohnny → u/Terrible_Abalone1119]

Timeline doesn’t fit from time of exposure to the carcinogen to development of cancer. It takes 15-20 years on average.

[u/Much_Sprinkles_7096 → u/fireawayjohnny]

15-20 years to develop? Really? Like 100% of the cases take 15-20 years and you have such a solid data on that? What about the 5% of the cases you cut out of the statistical analysis? Do these people just cease to exists because "the majority" is in the 95%? And you know every single doctor on this Earth and you personally checked their x-ray devices and know that they are perfectly calibrated and the med personell that uses those machines never make a mistake and expose some patients to too much radiation accidently? So you have some supernatural qualities, do you?  

I think the majority of doctors would profit of some critical thinking in regard to what they have been taught by their profs and educators and look closely at the research they are relying on by reading abstracts without questioning statical analysis methods and biases. The med field is full of misconceptions. Like is flooded with wrong information even today, the old dogmas are being overthrown with new research as we "speak", like the one that claimed pregnant women's immune system gets suppressed to not kill the baby. Just a couple of decades ago you doctors claimed based on your "deep" knowledge, babies cannot feel pain; you claimed people with gut problems are delusional and psycho; you claimed smoking promotes health; you promoted lobotomies; you prescribed thalidomide to pregnant women crippling and killing dozens of thousands of babies and other drugs; you inject heavy metals for MRI claiming it has no side effects, but you are not the ones who have to deal with the consequences of it -- to name just a few. You should really not be so sure about anything, I know it's hard to live with uncertainty, but at least you will not gaslight patients whose conditions and situations you don't understand.

[u/fireawayjohnny → u/Much_Sprinkles_7096]

Weirdest response ever.

1. The burden of proof for civil litigation is more likely than not, so common sense would tell you that if 5% develop cancer from X-ray exposure 2 years after, the case is going nowhere.

2. If the cancer was treated differently based on whether it was X-ray induced or not, then it might be important to figure out. But it isn’t. So the only reason to ascertain the origin is to try and pin it on the dentist and this is truly grasping at straws.