[Closed] NHS dentists

you go to the NHS dentist it costs you. why does it cost you if its supplied through NHS?

Same reason that prescriptions cost you money - not everything supplied by the NHS is free at the point of delivery. There's no real rhyme or reason for it, arguably good dental care is more important than many of the things provided for free on the NHS.

A lot of this stuff is left over from the rather piecemeal way that the ragtag of professions and services were incorporated into the NHS in the first place. Bits like GPs being private contractors with a massive book of different fees they can bill the NHS for each activity they do.

A lot of the rules the NHS operates under don't really stand up to scrutiny - eg you get free prescriptions for everything if you are on epilepsy medication, but not if you are on medication for most other chronic conditions.

But that's the way it is.

ok thanks.

any idea how the different costs vary?

£20 check up with NHS dentist would cost what private?

£30 filling with NHS, how much private?

cheers

NHS dentistry has been a charged for service since about 1951, so not that long after the NHS started up. As a patient you pay approximately 80% of the cost (in theory). As far as I know, the charges were introduced as dentistry is an expensive service to provide and making the pt pay for it saves the government money. It's "less essential" than treating heart attacks/ cancer so introducing charges was more politically palatable for dentistry than other areas of healthcare.

Dentistry IS an expensive service to provide, like all of healthcare, costs for staff and materials are increasing (brexit ain't helping either) and the breadth of treatment that is expected to be available to a patient is ever increasing too. Sadly NHS funding has not really increased very much over the last 20 years.

As an NHS practice that leaves you with a model of providing a large quantity of cheap dentistry to a large number of patients as quickly as possible while trying to drive your overheads down to the lowest possible level. Those factors don't usually encourage the highest quality of service.

Many practices move totally or at least partly outside the system to allow themselves to see a smaller number of patients with less time pressure and use more expensive materials and hopefully provide a higher quality service as a result. Exactly how much more you pay as a patient depends on the area you live in and the practice itself - the environment, the experience and ability of staff etc. Private practises should publish their fees and personal reccomendation from friends so a good way of selecting a practice.

biggest cartel going these dentists.. con from top to bottom.. local dentist goes from nhs to private so now i pay 20 odd quid a month.. until i go on holiday in that devon.. toothache.. rings EVERY dentist in 20 miles radius.. we re private and we only take our own patients.. ah i hav insurance.. not with us you dont cheerio..

dont get toothache.. dont pay the robbing twonks a penny..

Does vary, but significantly more. Introductory appts/check ups were 60 quid with my private dentist. Fillings can be hundreds, depending on what you need.

£20 check up with NHS dentist would cost what private?

£30 filling with NHS, how much private?

No idea about private, but you'll not pay £30 for, well, anything at an NHS dentist. There are three treatment bands with a set fee for each, something like £20, £50 and £200 (ish). The first is basically your check-ups, scale & polish and all that jazz; the second is regular work like fillings, root canals, that sort of thing; the third is major jobs like bridging or getting a set of false teeth. You'll only ever pay one of those amounts.

not sure on private costs other than it's f'ing expensive, my wife had a crown and it cost thousands. But she is phobic, has a dentist she likes, and stays with them.

I'm (embarrassingly) on Denplan with my parents and sister - because we joined as a family donkey's years ago and have never left. The cost for my parents to stay insured vs the cost for all four of us is so similar, not worth having my own policy.

But that might be worth considering...... OK you pay monthly hopefully for stuff you won't need but avoids the massive bills that could come from a private bill.

Ah, it's gone up a bit. Here.

http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/1781.aspx?CategoryID=74

[i]There are three NHS charge bands:
[list][*]Band 1: £20.60 covers an examination, diagnosis and advice. If necessary, it also includes X-rays, a scale and polish and planning for further treatment. [/*]
[*]Band 2: £56.30 covers all treatment covered by Band 1, plus additional treatment, such as fillings, root canal treatment and removing teeth (extractions). [/*]
[*]Band 3: £244.30 covers all treatment covered by Bands 1 and 2, plus more complex procedures, such as crowns, dentures and bridges.[/*][/list][/i]

To answer your question, a check up is often around £40 but you would usually have more time with the dentist for the extra money.

An NHS filling is actually closer to £55. Private fillings are often charged by size. £60 to £110 maybe but it varies massively. Again you're paying for the dentist to have more time to do the job and often use a more expensive, higher quality material.

The other thing to note is that NHS dental practices are all privately or corporately owned businesses that contract with the NHS to provide the service which is not the way GPs or hospitals were originally funded.

biggest cartel going these dentists.. con from top to bottom... dont pay the robbing twonks a penny..

And here lies the problem with modern life. Members of the public with very little understanding of the economics, history or reality of providing a service but happy to berate. Would probably vote for any party that promised to reduce public spending (and keep the money in their pocket where it rightfully belongs) and then moan about the standard of local services going down the pan too without appreciating the irony. Then a poster on the thread who clearly knows what they are talking about but its not cool to put value on expert opinion any more. Ignorance and negativity is king.

We get the NHS service we deserve. That's not to say there have not been problems with GP/Dental contracts in the past but overall we have never valued our medical provision sufficiently as a nation to dig deep enough in our pockets to get what we think we are entitled to.

Standard practice IME is to go NHS (accept that it's hard to find some places but never been an issue for us) for standard checks and then if something significant needs doing you can choose the cheap NHS option or pay more for a private upgrade e.g. better fillings. Should say this is my wife's experience as I've never actually had to have any work done myself.

Again you're paying for the dentist to have more time to do the job and often use a more expensive, higher quality material.

This is key. If you are short of money then use NHS, if you have spare money/care about your teeth more than buying a new bit for your bike then go private as the services offered are not the same.

If you are short of money then use NHS, if you have spare money/care about your teeth more than buying a new bit for your bike then go private as the services offered are not the same.

We get the NHS service we deserve. That's not to say there have not been problems with GP/Dental contracts in the past but overall we have never valued our medical provision sufficiently as a nation to dig deep enough in our pockets to get what we think we are entitled to.

+1

why does it cost you if its supplied through NHS?

Same reason I have to pay for specs (though there is a laughable NHS contribution for "complex prescriptions").

Pretty much impossible to find an NHS dentist here. I pay about £100 for a check up and clean. Luckily my dental health is very good, very rarely need work doing.

Just for balance Ulysse I had a cap that fell out regular as clockwork that was carried out privately by a dentist I rated (he sorted the long-term abscess caused by a very poor NHS root filling). The private cap cost the thick end of £400 (edit for cost).
Plus comparing caps with implants a little disingenuous, no? The engineering in an implant is quite different to a cap.

I use centre for dentistry which is in my local Sainsburys as I couldn't find a local NHS dentist
[url= http://www.centrefordentistry.com/prices/ ][/url]

Think it's 100 for a year for two check ups and two cleans and a discount off any other treatment.I have had a root canal and crown which was the most expensive thing they do compared to the NHS but can't fault them.I have more xrays with them than probably the last ten years of NHS, they seem really good. I think they make their money on cosmetic stuff so the routine stuff is fairly reasonably priced I think for what feels like much better service.

I think my point was, if at the time I'd been told a cap could fall out up to three times a year and other options would have been more suitable, even at xyz expense, I'd have opted for the more complex treatment earlier.

My NHS dentist is bloody great!

I gave up with NHS dentists a while back. I always got the impression that they were just looking for an excuse to kick you off the NHS register and imposed all sorts of silly rules like, if you re-arrange your appointment 3 times, your out, if you miss 2 appointments you're out. Been going PAYG for a while now and it's not that much more expensive on an annual basis assuming your teeth are in reasonable nick and you don't need any specific treatments and you just get a much better service all round. Annual check up costs are not that much more expensive, a visit to the hygienist is the same price as the NHS don't subsidise that, and the NHS didn't do white fillings so no more expensive to replace my silver fillings with white ones as and when needed.

Obviously if you need anything major like root canal work or anything else then it is more expensive under PAYG, but then under NHS you just get the very basics and if you want anything more than that then you pay under Private terms.

I had the local NHS dentist in Rothwell (on Butcher Lane...the clue should be in the address). They operate on such tight timescales that the materials and time they take to do a job just isn't the same as private. For the last four years I have used a private local dentist and the difference is stark. The quality of the work done and the finish has been so much better, but more importantly repairs that had failed after less than a year with the NHS dentist have held up for 3 years and counting with the private dentist. It's not cheap, but you only have one set of teeth.

So was the "cap" guy, Wallop, in other treatments , but I think he was happy to take the NHS coin 3 times a year rather then offer the correct for me course of action.

Had the option of NHS or private at the dentist I signed up to. Difference they said was in the appointment availability and treatment options. Prices for basics weren't that much different, though going private they try to get you on a hygienist plan which costs a fair bit per visit (though I do actually feel it's worth it even if I'm normally a cynic with these things. Pay attention to cleaning and regular visits has resulted in very little work to be done by the dentist).

Went private myself and one of the reasons is because I can avoid mercury fillings. Though I understand white fillings can be had on the NHS but I believe they're offered only as a necessity. Private and they're instantly available.

Not that I get additional fillings, but had a couple from my youth that needed replacing (god knows what damage the mercury content had done as one was leaking).

As for expensive stuff, if your teeth are a mess and will need a lot of work over your life time, then I'd go with an insurance plan. If they're in good condition, save the money.

Went private myself and one of the reasons is because I can avoid mercury fillings. Though I understand white fillings can be had on the NHS but I believe they're offered only as a necessity. Private and they're instantly available.

You get white fillings on the NHS if it's a visible area of the tooth. According to my dentist, the amalgam ones are preferable in most cases as they're a lot harder-wearing than the white ones.

Not that I get additional fillings, but had a couple from my youth that needed replacing (god knows what damage the mercury content had done as one

None whatsoever. The mercury is part of a compound, it's inert. Which makes sense if you think about it, if it was a health risk you'd see a lot of very poorly dentists. You'll have more mercury in your system from eating fish than from a mouthful of fillings.

Leaking what, exactly?

(god knows what damage the mercury content had done as one was leaking).

😀

Leaking is reference to the filling no longer sealing the cavity so moisture and bacteria is getting into the cavity. This is a bad thing. Leaking is in no way referencing the mercury!

As cougar says above amalgam is still a better filling material for a long term solution and it's only really vanity that means white fillings composites are used instead. I went against family (retired dentist) advice and had a white filling on a molar and regretted a few years later. Amalgam for me from now on (fingers crossed not to be needed).

Cougar - something for you to chew on. 😉

http://www.drmyhill.co.uk/wiki/Mercury_-_Toxicity_of_Dental_Amalgam_-_Why_you_should_have_your_dental_amalgams_removed

Cougar - Moderator 
According to my dentist, the amalgam ones are preferable in most cases as they're a lot harder-wearing than the white ones.

It's definitely true white are not as durable and that was pointed out to me. My dentist did mention some patients have concerns about mercury but stated the official line that it's considered safe and left it to me to decide, but certainly wasn't recommending either amalgam or white in preference, just presented the pros and cons of each.

None whatsoever. The mercury is part of a compound, it's inert. Which makes sense if you think about it, if it was a health risk you'd see a lot of very poorly dentists. You'll have more mercury in your system from eating fish than from a mouthful of fillings.

Mercury is relatively inert in itself, but doesn't stop it being highly toxic as a heavy metal the body is intolerant to. It's well established that amalgam fillings release mercury vapour over the lifetime they are in the mouth (FDA amongst others acknowledge this), though claims are the levels are safe. Those claims are of course from government backed medical authorities, who are not about to admit that the vast majority of the population has anything dangerous in their mouths.

Of course there's little conclusive evidence, but long term studies are lacking. Current line is there is little or no evidence of effects, despite many concerns. Terry Pratchett even believed his Alzheimer's came from mercury from fillings https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/feb/15/mercury-fillings-alzheimers

But then he was a fantasy author not a dentist 😉

Leaking what, exactly?

Probably the wrong dental term, but cracking and disintegrating fillings in my case and probable ingestion of the metal. Again, it's claimed to be below legal limits, but it's a concern.

Anyway, truth or not, it's one less risk. My old ones were falling apart and falling out, so I'd much rather the white as replacement.

Fish - true. I do like fish though. Apparently you just need to steer clear of the ones at the top of the food chain 😀

So why is the use of mercury being phased out in the UK? As I understand it many countries stopped using it years ago.

MY NHS dentist was a bit rubbish. I got some bad advice and some bad work. I ended up going private. Prices are here

https://www.bupa.co.uk/dental/find-dental-centre/newcastle-upon-tyne-dental-centre

corrective work for me (replacing fillings) added up to "you could buy a bike for that" but I am now trouble free for years. If you've had dental problems then you'll appreciate how valuable this is.

In the past I've had some brilliant NHS dentists. It isn't the NHS/Private choice that makes one better than the other. Good and bad dentists do both types of work.

A lot of this stuff is left over from the rather piecemeal way that the ragtag of professions and services were incorporated into the NHS in the first place.

So why is the use of mercury being phased out in the UK? As I understand it many countries stopped using it years ago.

As I understand it, the recent decision to phase out the use of amalgam in the EU is based on reducing the amount of mercury released into the environment when people are buried / cremated and not to do with a proven risk to the living. That's also the reason that it was banned in Scandinavia some years ago.

And I quote

"The European Parliament agreed on 14 March 2017 to the final version of its Regulation on Mercury. The Regulation is the EU's instrument to ratify the Minamata Treaty of 2013.

The Minamata Treaty is a global environmental treaty aimed at reducing the release of mercury into the environment. The EU's Mercury Regulation has the same aim for the territory of the European Union. Both documents prescribe a phase-down of the use of dental amalgam for environmental reasons."

And.....

"It is important to note that the EU Regulation on Mercury is an environmental regulation, not a health regulation. The EU cannot make laws that directly change the way health systems in member states are arranged. The EU's Scientific Committee is clear that:

"Current evidence does not preclude the use of amalgam in dental restorative treatment in the general population. Dental restorative therapy during pregnancy, as for any other therapeutic treatment, should be limited as much as possible in order to reduce the exposure of the foetus. The choice of material should be based on patient characteristics such as primary or permanent teeth, pregnancy, the already existent number of dental amalgam fillings, presence of allergies to mercury or other components of the restorative materials, and presence of decreased renal clearance."

FWIW, there are people who believe that the resins used in white fillings are carcinogenic so you pay your money........as they say.

Best thing to do is brush and floss (or clean between the teeth with small brushes) regularly and efficiently and limit the number of times a day you eat stuff with (any kind of) sugar in. Then you won't need as many fillings

sadexpunk - Member
ok thanks.

any idea how the different costs vary?

£20 check up with NHS dentist would cost what private?

£30 filling with NHS, how much private?

cheers

I am on private so every six months I visit my dentist to pay £80 for general cleaning and checkup. My guess is £40 each as starting point.

For filling the starting point is I think around £50. I had a crack tooth and my dentist gave me a softer filling which I think I paid £57 for. Extraction is around £80 ...

I am happy with my current dentist.

So why is the use of mercury being phased out in the UK? As I understand it many countries stopped using it years ago.

As Ceepers said, but also because there are better things available nowadays. But that doesn't automatically mean that what existed before is 'dangerous' and must be replaced / avoided at all costs.

And what does better mean; as noted that isn't necessarily an easy equation, the resins used have their own hazards (certainly prior to curing) and if they don't last as long and you therefore eventually need more treatments / suffer more decay because of fillings breaking up what is the comparative exposure of multiple treatments vs a single one of amalgam, etc.

Cougar - Moderator
...The mercury is part of a compound, it's inert. Which makes sense if you think about it, if it was a health risk you'd see a lot of very poorly dentists. You'll have more mercury in your system from eating fish than from a mouthful of fillings.

The risk was more to the dentist because of handling mercury in its raw state with bare hands.

My uncle was a dentist and he used to joke how you could spot a dental convention at tea time -the rattling of the tea cups as all their hands shook. He reckoned it was the effect of the mercury on their nervous systems.

They also had a short life expectancy, around 55 if I recall right. There was also a high suicide rate. (He lived to 96, but all of his contemporaries were dead long since.)

Presumably it's much safer now.

If you Google Alison Adams, a dentist who accidentally touched some mercury and became very ill. My own dentist considerably improved his health by having (mercury) amalgams removed.

It's easy to have a heavy metal toxicity test done if you're concerned about your mercury level. A provoking agent called DMSA is used which results in smelly wee.

The psychiatrist and psychopharmacologist Dr David Healy has a really good blog with mercury mentioned here:

https://davidhealy.org/pharmacosis-the-day-the-music-died/
https://davidhealy.org/go-figure-the-silver-lining-clouds-the-view/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12873108

Not disputing there are better things nowadays but nothing is without potential hazard.

My future work (if any) will be resin. Will I be replacing all my amalgams? Probably not.

cinnamon_girl - Member
If you Google Alison Adams, a dentist who accidentally touched some mercury and became very ill. My own dentist considerably improved his health by having (mercury) amalgams removed...

When I was a kid, I spent many a happy hour playing with mercury. 🙂

If you Google Alison Adams, a dentist who accidentally touched some mercury and became very ill.

That's a bit like implying motorways are dangerous because someone once got hurt laying the tarmac for one.

On reflection I guess the reduction of risk to dentists and the reduction of risk for the harmful disposal of mercury (didn't realise that crematorium were the biggest single pollutant of mercury) are good reasons to look for alternatives but actively getting rid of a perfectly sound amalgam filling would be folly and anecdotal health improvements of someone doing so is as likely to be a placebo effect or coincidence as a genuine benefit(unless they are one of a very small percentage of the population who have an allergic reaction to an element in amalgam but in a very mild form).

When I was a kid, I spent many a happy hour playing with mercury.

Me too. My primary teacher poured a little onto our palms and we passed it from one to the next. He made us wash our hands afterwards so that's ok!

We weren't quite that bad but when someone broke a thermometer in science class instead of evacuating the building, the teacher showed it to us all pouring it from beaker to beaker......

We also used to happily splash about in aromatic solvents at my first job - never did us any harm, etc.

I would strongly advice take take out insurance and pit a few quid away to pay the dentist before claiming the insurance.

Just consider it a tax.

blimey, didnt expect two pages, but thanks for all the info, i understand it better now. ill ring a few dentists and ask for private prices, see how they compare individually and take it from there.

cheers

Slight aside but the phrase "mad as a hatter" originates from the toxic effects on milliners of using mercury to felt hats a couple of centuries ago!

The other thing to note is that NHS dental practices are all privately or corporately owned businesses that contract with the NHS to provide the service which is not the way GPs or hospitals were originally funded.

It's not the same though.

GP practices have historically been paid a "capitation" payment based on the size of population they serve. They also receive central funding for things like the NHS computer system etc. Although they are incredibly busy, the hour to hour financial pressures are not the same. They also don't need the same amount of very costly equipment or materials to provide the service.

GPs themselves are paid a nationally agreed salary. Most dentists, even non-practice owning ones , are self employed subcontractors paid based on a percentage of the fees they collect and the associated costs.

Dental practices were always paid on an item of service arrangement for the actual treatments provided. The money to open and equip the practice and the whole financial risk (which is considerable) has always been carried by the dentist themselves.

Admittedly the model for GP practices and hospitals has been pushed further towards this over the years.

The business choice most practice owners are faced with is

1. Work very very hard and quickly to a point where your stress levels are high and you are compromising the time or quality of the job you do and still be worrying about keeping the bank magager from your door under a system that year on year expects you to provide more for the same income into your business.

2. Charge more for your service and move outside the NHS. Be more in control of your working life, See fewer patients, have more time with each one, have a slightly less stressful working life and get to use more expensive and complex treatments (which is more interesting as a clinician too) and keep your bank manager happier.

Given a choice most people, however much they believe they ought to be able to provide NHS dentistry to everyone, would choose 2

Also worth pointing out that private dental practices don't really generate more profit than NHS ones as businesses according to the figures over the last number of years.

Slight aside but the phrase "mad as a hatter" originates from the toxic effects on milliners of using mercury to felt hats a couple of centuries ago!

Cougar - something for you to chew on.

Totally looks like a credible source, that.

Mercury is relatively inert in itself, but doesn't stop it being highly toxic as a heavy metal the body is intolerant to. It's well established that amalgam fillings release mercury vapour over the lifetime they are in the mouth (FDA amongst others acknowledge this), though claims are the levels are safe.

True. But the levels we're talking about are minute. Like I said, you're going to be exposed to more mercury by eating a tuna sandwich. And AIUI, the act of removing amalgam filings will cause more exposure than if you left them alone.

If you Google Alison Adams, a dentist who accidentally touched some mercury and became very ill.

I Googled "Alison Adams mercury" and the first hit was here: http://www.electricsense.com/9737/natural-recovery-plan-radiation/

She's a "naturopath" (whateverTF that is) who's selling books. The opening gambit here states [i]"[b]From birth[/b] Alison suffered from chronic digestive, endocrine, musculoskeletal and hearing problems. As she grew older other allergies and sensitivities were added to the list along with reproductive problems and almost constant infections."[/i]

She then spilled some mercury once and concluded that was the reason she was ill. Now, it's entirely possible that she did have some sort of adverse reaction to it, but extrapolating that to "I touched mercury therefore fillings cause chronic fatigue, ME and fibromyalgia" is mince of the highest order. See epicyclo's and convert's posts up there for a start. ^^ I've played with mercury as a kid too, and I've yet to become chronically ill (quiet at the back).

She then goes on to talk about a theory of the "mouth electric," based on the notion that fillings contain different metals like a battery. So, y'know, she either has no concept of what a ****ing compound or is being wilfully deceitful in order to sell books.

Oh, and I almost overlooked the site doing that write-up. It's to help people with "electromagnetic sensitivity" (via books, electric meters, detox programmes, all conveniently for sale on that site).

[img] [/img]

Cougar - when I was growing up it was standard practice for dentists to 'drill and fill', the more fillings they did meant more money for them. Every tooth in my mouth was filled from an early age, some of these fillings were literally huge blobs that had been plonked onto a tooth with no effort being made to make it look neat.

Before removing amalgams a test is carried out using an electrogalvanic meter which helps to give an idea of the electrical activity of fillings and potential mercury release.

My amalgams were removed by a specialist dentist using specialist equipment namely an air filtration system that removes impurities such as mercury vapour from the air. A rubber dam was also used.

To be fair it tends to be unhealthy people that have this procedure carried out. It's not for the feint-hearted and is extremely costly. Interestingly though, my (functional medicine) Lyme doctor does not recommend this procedure.

Alison Adams removed her website, a shame as it was a good resource. Haven't used a Naturopath so can't comment but I would however say that those of us who've been failed at some point by conventional (pharma) medicine and its practitioners tend to start ploughing our own furrow.

If you have an autoimmune condition, and an increasing number of people do, then you can be affected by lots of different things. Electromagnetic sensitivity is one, multiple chemical sensitivity is another etc. I don't use antibacterial products, fluoride toothpaste or mouthwash, parabens etc etc. Have a load of essential oils in the cupboard waiting to be turned into cleaning products.

Quite used to being laughed at, my kids certainly do. Haven't yet told them about the Shamanic healing. 😉

Although there have always been cowboys in any profession, I think you would find that most dentists working in the 70's and 80's were not motivated by greed and thought they were doing the right thing. Also as mentioned above, if the government creates a system where your livelihood depends on how much you drill and fill, is not surprising that's what the profession was encouraged to do.

Knowledge, materials and the philosophy behind dental treatment have moved on a long way and to a much less invasive more preventive approach since then. The NHS remuneration system is still very much tied to a payment for intervention approach sadly and that is one of the faults with how things currently stand and another reason dentist are moving outside it.

those of us who've been failed at some point by conventional (pharma) medicine and its practitioners tend to start ploughing our own furrow.

Sure. And that's exactly what they bank on. "Big pharma" is hopelessly corrupt (I recommend Ben Goldacre's [url= https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B008PCVGKI/ ]book[/url] on this) but that doesn't automatically mean the alternatives have any merit. Of course, it doesn't mean they [i]don't[/i] either, but you need to approach any alternative "medicine" with a critical eye as I guarantee that if any of it was provably efficacious beyond placebo the pharmaceutical industry would have found a way to monetise it. Because that's the bottom line, whether it's conventional medicine or alternative "medicine," someone somewhere is making a lot of money.

the more fillings they did meant more money for them
...
It's not for the feint-hearted and is extremely costly.

Not seeing any correlation here? (-:

If you have an autoimmune condition, and an increasing number of people do, then you can be affected by lots of different things. Electromagnetic sensitivity is one

Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity is not a recognised medical condition by any medical board I'm aware of. It's a myth. There's a lengthy article exploring research [url= https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4072 ]here[/url] but his closing paragraph is as good a somethingion as any:

[i]The ability of a human brain to convince itself of just about anything is not to be underestimated. If you are experiencing stress (and just about everyone is experiencing some stress), whatever you attribute it to will inevitably create more stress whenever you encounter it. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you believe yourself to be electrosensitive, then you will be, quite literally, whenever you perceive the presence of electromagnetism. This doesn't mean that you have a paranormal ability to detect electromagnetic fields. You don't. But you might be able to hear the high-frequency ring of your neighbor's television set, or see the 60-Hz flickering of a fluorescent light bulb, or you might see that your computer has found a WiFi network or that your cell phone has four bars of signal. There are many ways that a person can detect the probable presence of electromagnetic radiation without the ability to directly sense it. And, if you've fallen into the self-fulfilling syndrome of believing yourself to be electrosensitive, you will actually suffer measurable physical symptoms and can potentially become acutely ill. By the same token, if you believe strongly enough that acupuncture or vitamins will cure your electrosensitivity, they probably will.[/i]

It's fallacious to say, for example, homeopathy "doesn't work." The fact is that it doesn't work [i]beyond placebo.[/i] And the placebo effect can be very powerful indeed. Which leads us to another thorny question; should doctors be allowed to prescribe placebo products? I'm not sure as I have the answer to that one.

Ceepers, what you said was:

... NHS dental practices are all privately or corporately owned businesses that contract with the NHS to provide the service which is not the way GPs or hospitals were originally funded.

Which is not true. Not the structure of that contract may be different, but GP's are privately owned businesses that contract with the NHS to provide a service. Perhaps those who negotiate those contracts on their collective behalf have done a better job than Dentist's representatives? or perhaps it is simply that the service is rather different: dentists encourage people to see them routinely with no health concerns, doctors don't; dentists actually execute much of the treatment themselves, most GP's make referrals; GP's typically see patients for 5 minutes, dentists for 20+ minutes; GP's usually work alone, dentists need nursing staff for every procedure etc.

GP practices have historically been paid a "capitation" payment based on the size of population they serve. They also receive central funding for things like the NHS computer system etc. Although they are incredibly busy, the hour to hour financial pressures are not the same.

They also don't need the same amount of very costly equipment or materials to provide the service.

GPs themselves are paid a nationally agreed salary.

Most dentists, even non-practice owning ones , are self employed subcontractors paid based on a percentage of the fees they collect and the associated costs.

GPs themselves are paid a nationally agreed salary

Not true...
A partner (the traditional gp model) owns and runs the business.often, they own the premises..their 'salary' is practice income minus expenses... As expenses are climbing and practice income falls etc etc, partnership income declines.

GPs aren't really responsible or 'pay' for the cost of drugs they prescribe (this comes from the ccg budget)..however, the budget is finite, and a GP (as should any doctor/prescriber) should practice cost effective prescribing.
Basically, if I offer everyone who wants brand name drugs, kids with cancer may not get treatment as the budget is blown..

dentists actually execute much of the treatment themselves, most GP's make referrals;

Don't worry , most people WITHIN the NHS don't fully understand how primary care works, why it's so cost effective, and why a model staffed only by 'individual system specialists' would last about 8 minutes before it ran out of cash and ideas...!!

I know this isn't the question the OP asked, but the concept of a service model spanning nhs/private could be applied to a GP practice..

DrP

Ok I stand corrected. GPs aren't my specialist area. I still stand by the fact that historically GPs were funded based more on a population they administered to basis rather than an "item of treatment" they provided basis. I know that is changing but it changes the dynamic.

Dentists have generally suffered because they are a les powerful lobby than the gps. No government can stomach GP strikes - look at the mess over junior doctors.

Historically the governments have been happy to force dentists out of the NHS by refusing to negotiate and enforcing a contract that the profession knew would have a negative impact on patients and their access to the service (hmmm where have we heard about that recently? It has negatively impacted access and quality by the way, just like the profession said it would) then allow the public to think they're just money grabbing cowboys who are being too greedy.