joel m. eichen d.d.s.

SPONSORED LINKS BY GOOGLE

I also find it interesting that my malpractice carrier, on their
questionaire asks me if 1) i use thermafill
2) i do sargenti root canals

----------------
I knew they asked about Sargenti root canals, but they're starting to
ask about Thermafil now? I wonder what kind of statistics they are
keeping about Thermafil....very interesting.

By the way, the thing that scares me about using N2 is not the
effectiveness of it (obviously, Alvin has had great success with it),
but rather the small chances of success in a lawsuit should something
go wrong.....damn lawyers!! I found this on the internet while
searching for information on N2--->a lawyer actively looking for
people that have been (or think they have been) treated with N2 by
their dentist. There's also another article about a woman who won a
judgement of one million dollars against her dentist for using
N2......... Even if I wanted to use N2 and believed it was safe,
this kind of legal climate scares me.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Sargenti Paste Used by Many Dentists for Performing Root Canals Can
Be Highly Toxic and Cause Serious Injuries

The Law Offices of Shawn Khorrami is representing clients who
sustained serious injuries as a result of the use of a controversial
and highly toxic filling material used by dentists during root canal
therapy. The filling material is known as Sargenti Paste, N2 or RC2B.
It has never been approved by the FDA largely because it contains the
toxic chemicals paraformaldehude and lead.

The use of this filling material is condemned by various dental groups
including the American Association of Endodontists. However, many
general dentists and endodontists, particularly those belonging to the
American Endodontics Society advocate the use of this paste in
conjunction with root canal therapy.

Sargenti Paste has been associated with tissue destruction,
mummification and a compromise of the local tissue?s immune system
capabilities, particularly when the drug or its vapors come in contact
with bone. Among other things, the victim is susceptible to infections
that can result in the loss of all or part of the jaw and other bones
around the mouth. The individual will likely require multiple
surgeries potentially amounting to hundreds of thousands of dollars in
medical bills.

If you feel you know or suspect that your dentist used Sargenti Paste
when performing your root canal, or you have had serious infections
and/or bone loss in your mouth and you want to explore your rights you
are advised to contact the Law Offices of Shawn Khorrami. For further
information and free consultation, please contact us either
electronically or by telephone at (866) 340-1726

Another law group "The Dentalaw Group" had this on their website....
--------------------------------

Manufacturer's escape from liability for toxic Sargenti paste blamed
on legal malpractice of plaintiff's former counsel; successor counsel
settles with dentist for $1,000,000.00; attorney defendant settles
legal malpractice action for another $437,500.00

The plaintiff, age twenty-seven in 1984, underwent several endodontic
(root-canal) procedures by her general dentist using the controversial
filling material variously called Sargenti paste, N2 and RC2B. The
drug has never been approved by the FDA nor the Council on Dental
Therapeutics of the ADA, largely because it contains the highly toxic
paraformaldehyde and lead and has never been tested for use in humans.

Tissue destruction, mummification and a compromise of the local
tissue's immune system capabilities results when the drug or its
vapors come in contact with bone. The plaintiff's immune system became
so compromised that she developed a fulminating Actinomycosis
infection which resulted in the loss of half of her lower jaw, more
than forty surgeries, and medical expenses over $300,000.

The plaintiff's initial lawsuit was against her general dentist.
During the pendency of that lawsuit, the plaintiff changed counsel and
retained the defendant lawyer and her firm. Seven months into this
representation, the statute of limitation for products liability
against the drug manufacturer expired. After the statute of limitation
period expired, the plaintiff discharged defendant counsel and
retained new counsel who settled her dental malpractice claim for
$1,000,000. The plaintiff then sued defendant counsel and firm for
legal malpractice, alleging the defendant failed to recognize the
liability of the manufacturer and protect her from the expiration of
the statute of limitation.

The drug was manufactured by Benito Ciccione, a New York pharmacist
operating as Elbee Chemists, and was distributed throughout the United
States by Ciccione's marketing company, Available Products, Inc. The
pharmacist, pharmacy and distributor were covered by one policy of
liability insurance with one million dollar limits. Co-counsel for
plaintiff, Edwin J. Zinman, had previously obtained a jury verdict
against these entities, including punitive damages, on the same issues
in a San Francisco, California case. Although the plaintiff would have
had to overcome a $1 million set-off if the case had proceeded to
trial, a $437,500 settlement was reached.

--
Joel M. Eichen, .
Philadelphia PA
STANDARD DISCLAIMER applies:
<You fill it in>