As revealed in the Worthing Herald, Juan Carlos Barreto Rubio, who ran the Beach Road Dental Care surgery in Beach Road, Littlehampton before it suddenly closed down earlier last year, failed to complete work on a patient after receiving the payment to do so. 

At a hearing of the GDC’s Professional Conduct Committee on June 28th, Mr Barreto Rubio was deemed no longer able to practice dentistry in the UK, after having been suspended while being investigated. 

 The committee said: “The Committee has concluded that Mr Barreto Rubio’s misconduct is so serious that it is fundamentally incompatible with his remaining on the Dentists’ Register.”

 Mr Barreto Rubio accepted £2628 from a patient for dental implants between November 3 and December 15, 2016, while knowing he was bankrupt and failed to complete the work.

From March 3 to May 11, 2017, he also failed to co-operate with a dental council investigation or respond to the patient’s written complaint.

While the council acknowledged ‘the circumstances leading up the bankruptcy of Mr Barreto Rubio’s dental practice were stressful’, there was a ‘wholesale failure to keep patient information secure’ and ‘a persistent lack of insight or acknowledgement of the seriousness of the misconduct’.

Mr Barreto-Rubio did not attend the committee hearing or have any legal representation and is now believed to be living in Tenerife and considers himself retired from dentistry.

Paul Dela Cruz, owner of Benz and Blanc in Leeds Corn Exchange, pleaded guilty to offering illegal tooth whitening and was ordered to pay more than £2,000 by Leeds Magistrates’ Court this week.

After receiving a complaint that Benz and Blanc was offering illegal tooth whitening services, the General Dental Council (GDC) launched an investigation and, on 4 April 2018, Mr Dela Cruz held himself out to undercover investigators as being prepared to practise dentistry, namely tooth whitening, illegally.

Under the Dentists Act 1984 and following the High Court’s ruling in GDC v Jamous, the legal position in relation to tooth whitening is very clear. The treatment can only be performed by a dentist or a dental therapist, dental hygienist or a clinical dental technician working to the prescription of a dentist.

Katie Spears, Head of Illegal Practice at the General Dental Council said:

“Our primary purpose at the GDC is to protect the public from harm. Illegal tooth whitening represents a real risk as those who carry it out are neither qualified to assess a patient’s suitability for the treatment nor are they able to intervene should an emergency arise. The GDC takes reports of illegal practice of dentistry very seriously and, where appropriate, will prosecute in the criminal courts.”

Anyone considering tooth whitening should first check the register of dental professionals on the GDC’s website to ensure the individual offering the treatment is qualified to do so.

The British Dental Association (BDA) has called for sweeping changes to food marketing and product formulation, as new research published today (27 July) reveals the extent of misleading claims on sugar-rich cereals aimed at children.

Analysis of packaging for the 13 top selling cereals from Cardiff University, published in the British Dental Journal, has revealed:

• At the manufacturer’s suggested portion sizes, eight out of 13 top cereals provide over half the Public Health England recommended daily sugar intake for 4-6 year olds.
• Imagery used on packets depicts servings three times the size of manufacturers’ recommended portion sizes. Children eating these volumes would exceed their daily sugar allowance by 12.5% on a single bowl alone. 
• The majority of products featured potentially misleading nutritional claims, designed to offer a ‘halo effect’ leaving consumers to consider them healthier than warranted, or ignore other warnings. Eleven out of 13 products made claims regarding one or more vitamins, while eight out of 13 were considered extremely high in sugar.
• Emotive language, such as ‘yummy’, ‘magical’ or ‘meet new friends’ dominated products aimed at children, with reassuring language on ‘quality’ and supposed nutritional value designed to appeal to parents.

Cereals are currently the second largest contributors of free sugars in children’s diets, accounting for 8% of intake for 4-10 year olds, and 7% for teenagers. Previous studies have concluded exaggerated portion sizes can contribute to consumers pouring up to 42% more cereal than recommended.

The BDA has expressed concern that cereal packet imagery continues to fall outside the Committee of Advertising Practice code relating to high fat, salt or sugary foods to children. It has called on the government to deliver both concrete changes to marketing guidelines and mandatory targets for sugar reduction, as part of its landmark obesity strategy.  

Tooth decay remains the number one reason for hospital admissions among children aged 5-9.

Russ Ladwa, Chair of the BDA’s Health and Science Committee, said:

“Breakfast is the most important meal of the day, but sadly marketeers are misleading the public on what constitutes healthy options and acceptable portion sizes. 

“It’s a toxic mix, with claims on ‘nutritional benefits’ designed to blind consumers to sugar content, images of super-sized portions to encourage overconsumption, and emotive language to fuel pester power. The result is a recipe for tooth decay and obesity.

“These billboards on our breakfast tables still fall entirely outside advertising regulations for marketing sugary foods to kids. Until government tightens up marketing rules, and sets concrete targets on reformulation, the UK will miss sugar reduction targets by a country mile.”

The study’s co-author, Maria Morgan, Senior Lecturer in Dental Public Health at Cardiff University, said:

“The big thing for me is the normalisation of bigger portion sizes in Britain, which is affecting childhood obesity, adult obesity and oral health. I don’t like parents being hoodwinked by the imagery.

“I would welcome reformulation of these products. We need to work with the industry on this. I am also worried about food labelling post-Brexit because currently food labelling conforms with EU regulations and going forward we want it as good as if not better than what we have now.”

On 31 July 2018 almost 36,000 dental care professionals (DCPs) will reach the end of their five-year CPD cycle, and those registrants must submit their CPD statement to the General Dental Council (GDC) no later than 28 August 2018. Today, however, the GDC revealed that with only five weeks to go, there are still more than 8,500 DCPs yet to make a submission, with the regulator raising serious concerns that this could lead to thousands putting themselves at risk of falling off the register and no longer being able to practise.

If the initial submission deadline is missed, registrants then have a short window in which to provide the regulator with full evidence of the CPD undertaken over their five-year cycle and, should that not be forthcoming, non-compliant registrants will face removal.

GDC Executive Director, Registration and Corporate Resources, Gurvinder Soomal, said: “We recognise the deadline is not yet upon us, but it is fast-approaching and with such a significant number still to make their CPD submissions, the risk is real that a significant number could end up falling off the register. I strongly encourage everyone who is yet to complete their submission to do so as soon as possible via the online portal at egdc-uk.org and avoid leaving it until the last minute.”

Further information is available at gdc-uk.org/professionals/cpd and the GDC can be contacted at cpd@gdc-uk.org or on 020 7167 6000 to answer questions.

An important and highly significant piece of new research coming out of the US has confirmed that adding fluoride to water supplies does not carry any negative health effects.

Since its introduction into toothpaste and some water supplies in the UK, fluoride has been the single most effective measure in reducing decay levels and improving the population’s oral health. This new study confirms what many of us, and what other smaller pieces of research, have suggested for years – water fluoridation is safe. Now it’s time to promote the introduction of water fluoridation in the many areas of the UK that are currently without it.

As a charity working to communicate the values of good oral health, we are proud to be one of the very first adopters of the concept of preventive dentistry. Almost half a century later, we are still trying to reinforce the message that keeping your teeth for life is not only possible, it should be expected.

Countless studies continue to link tooth loss to frailty, poor general health and wider systemic diseases, especially as we get older. How many teeth we have is also shown to be a predictor of life expectancy. Patients need to understand that keeping their teeth healthy is vital for their overall wellbeing and we should make sure that we don’t face the prospect of teeth being lost when we get older.

Thankfully, tooth loss has improved greatly over time. According to the latest figures, six per cent of adults in England are edentate, a decrease of 22 per cent over the last 30 years. During the same period, the proportion of adults who are edentate has also fallen in Wales by 27 per cent (to 10 per cent) and in Northern Ireland by 26 per cent (to seven per cent). There is no doubt that the single most important factor in these changes was the introduction of fluoride toothpaste. But it is now time for us to reconsider water fluoridation where we have seen no new scheme for over 20 years.

The next step: water: In January, figures were released by the Local Government Association (LGA), which revealed that there were well over 40,000 hospital operations needed to remove unhealthy teeth in children and teenagers in the last year alone. This equates to 170 operations across the country every single day.

There is a clear and frankly distressing problem where the oral health of young people in this country is concerned.

The solution, however, is not far out of reach. Earlier this year, Public Health England released a report that illustrated that areas across the country that have had fluoride added to their water have seen reduced levels of tooth decay, with no convincing evidence to suggest any adverse health effects.

Nationwide water fluoridation schemes could have a significant impact and help us put a dent into appalling childhood tooth extraction figures. For areas of lower social economic status, where childhood tooth decay is its highest, water fluoridation schemes could help reduce the inequalities that currently exist and help more children avoid painful and distressing procedures to remove rotten teeth under general anaesthetic.

Promoting the benefits: Despite the clear and obvious advantages of water fluoridation, as little as 12 per cent of the UK currently benefit from it. Those who oppose fluoride are extremely vocal in their objections and many local anti-fluoride campaigners have successfully managed to influence and de-rail water fluoridation schemes in certain areas.

It is now time to make our voices heard and be seen to actively promote the benefits. It is our responsibility to share these with patients and make sure that we do our best to assuage any worries or concerns about this naturally-occurring mineral. Many patients are still in the dark about fluoride and are unaware of what it is and what it does. It is important that we reach these groups and inform them about the reality before they are influenced by those who are against it. By gaining greater public support we can begin to tip the balance and see more water fluoridation schemes implemented in the UK – which would be a hugely positive move. 

The BDA has welcomed news today that a powerful group of MPs has castigated NHS England for the shambles it made of outsourcing its back-office function to private company, Capita.

In a scathing report published by the Public Accounts Committee, the MPs condemned both NHS England and Capita forcausing mayhem to health workers in the process and potentially “put[ing] patients at risk of serious harm.”

The BDA told MPs – in its written evidence to PAC – that the NHS England-Capita fiasco had forced hundreds of NHS dentists to stand idle for up to a year while patients were struggling to access NHS dentistry. The unacceptably long delays in processing NHS performer numbers (required before commencing NHS work), MPs were told, prevented NHS dentists from earning a living – putting their practices and their families in jeopardy. 

Henrik Overgaard-Nielsen, BDA Chair of General Dental Practice, said:

“We thank the MPs on the committee for listening to dentists’ concerns and for making NHS England take responsibility for its grotesque failure to manage the contract. 

“Given the well documented failures of NHS England to manage this contract, we have pointed out the irony to head of NHS England, Simon Stevens, that if a dentist repeatedly failed to deliver on a contract, they would be served breach notices and their contract terminated.

“The Public Accounts Committee seems to share our view that NHS England’s obsession with ‘saving’ money fails spectacularly to take account of the human cost on the hundreds of dentists forced to wait for months before they could care for their patients or support their families. 

“The PAC has exposed NHS England’s outsourcing of back office functions to Capita where profits come first. This is a false economy, which has short-changed patients and taxpayers and undermines the NHS.”

A London man, Jeffery Lehmann, has been ordered to pay more than £15,000 by Isleworth Crown Court, after having his previous conviction for illegal tooth whitening upheld. The failed appeal related to a 2017 conviction, which also saw Mr Lehmann issued with the first ever Criminal Behaviour Order (CBO) for the offence and prohibited him from providing dental services.

Mr Lehmann, a former dental technician, was removed from the General Dental Council’s (GDC) professional register in May 2012 for acting outside his scope of practice, causing harm to patients, failing to accept professional accountability for his actions and acting without integrity. Following a report received by the GDC in October 2016 that Mr Lehmann was offering tooth whitening, the regulator launched an investigation. Mr Lehmann subsequently held himself out to undercover investigators as being prepared to practise dentistry, namely tooth whitening, illegally.

At the original hearing in 2017, Mr Lehmann was ordered to pay more than £10,000, an amount which has now grown to more £15,000 to cover the costs of his failed appeal.

In ruling, Mr Recorder Bellamy-James QC said: “We consider he [Mr Lehmann] intentionally and flagrantly flouted the law and regulatory system. In evidence to us he showed an arrogant disregard for the policy of the law, the law and public safety… Harm to the public does not have to be shown but you could be described as a “charlatan” and we might agree with that description. You have your own view of policy and law and it was obvious from your own evidence that you do not approve of the law. You do not think it should apply to you, but it is there because of public risk.”

Under the Dentists Act 1984 and following the High Court’s ruling in GDC v Jamous, the legal position in relation to tooth whitening is very clear in that the treatment can only be performed by a dentist or a dental therapist, dental hygienist or a clinical dental technician working to the prescription of a dentist.

Katie Spears, Head of Illegal Practice at the General Dental Council said: “Our primary purpose at the GDC is to protect the public from harm. Illegal tooth whitening represents a real risk as those who carry it out are neither qualified to assess a patient’s suitability for the treatment nor are they able to intervene should an emergency arise. The GDC takes reports of illegal practice of dentistry very seriously and, where appropriate, will prosecute in the criminal courts.”

Anyone considering tooth whitening should first check the register of dental professionals on the GDC’s website to ensure the individual offering the treatment is qualified to do so.