There is a little bit of over-simplifying going on in this article, but it was an interesting read, especially for an anti-dentite like myself. The problem is that people don't go to the dentist just to have cavities filled. My first trip to my current dentist happened due to a severely painful toothache (to call it in ache is like calling a broken leg a paper cut). I had my bride do some research of local dentists (whatever she could cram into 5 minutes on google) and went with the guy that I perceived as having the best technology (but really the main criteria was the most open schedule).

What followed was a great experience: after 2 hours of patching things up, my pain was almost completely gone. After a few days of antibiotics, it was gone. The shot required to numb the area didn't hurt (it may have under normal circumstances, but ... "broken leg"). That single correction brought me back on schedule. I had a filling that was sensitive. He replaced it with a "new material", it was more sensitive, so he replaced it again with a different bonding (Neither I nor my insurance were charged) and that sensitivity went away. No cavity filled since then has been sensitive.

I've had a handful of cavities, and I return, reluctantly, but my loyalty lies more in the fact that I had a tangible, identifiable problem (excruciating pain, and later sensitivity) and he troubleshot it until it was fixed to my satisfaction. I wouldn't see another dentist simply because I believe this particular dentist to be predictable. I'll have a problem, he'll fix it. I, like other commentators, have a dentist who uses more than just X-Rays to diagnose cavities. At the moment, I have three spots on the X-Ray and DIAGNOdent that he has said he'd like to "wait on" because he wasn't sure. I had thought -- due to my past experience with tooth pain -- that "waiting on" something like that was asking for trouble, but now I'm wondering if I have a Dentist who understands the limitations of the technology he uses.