The State of Affairs in Orthodontics
in the Year 2000
The President of the United States annually gives a review of the state of affairs in our country. This is in the form of an address on television known as the "State of the Nation" address. This seems to be a wise decision and has served a good purpose through the years. Periodically every organization needs to stop and take stock of its state of progress.
The year 2000 is a rare milestone, and is an appropriate time for our profession to pause and take inventory, to honestly look objectively at whether we are rendering the type of service to our patients to which they are entitled. We must ask ourselves, have we been good stewards of the responsibility entrusted to us?
I am extremely proud of the progress we have made in this century. Many, many dedicated members have made great contributions. I wish I could name every one of them! There are two seminal contributions during this century which should be mentioned. The development of the cephalometric radiogram by Dr. B. Holly Broadbent and the adaptation of this cephalometric radiogram to the private office by Dr. Herbert Margolis, in my opinion are the most important contributions of this century-had the most dramatic effect on the practice of orthodontics.
The list of new developments is too long to try to list all of them, but to mention some of the more recent ones would seem to be appropriate. Orthognathic surgery has been a great boon to the orthodontist. Bonding of brackets has had a dramatic effect on the practice of orthodontics. The so-called wonder wires have also had a dramatic effect on the treatment of malocclusion. Built-in torque in brackets has had a very favorable effect on the treatment of malocclusion. Everything considered, we have made remarkable progress in the 20th century and we can all be extremely proud.
There is another phase of orthodontics which has been lacking. We have not made satisfactory progress in our literature. There are too many incorrect statements in the articles of our journals. These incorrect and inadequate articles appear quite frequently, and apparently are never recognized. I am talking about facts, not opinions. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but they have a moral obligation to publish only true facts. The published word should be gospel.
There are many published articles which should never get by the reviewer. They are a waste of journal space. The reviewer should be required to pass an examination to be chosen for this responsibility. A person gifted with words and clever speeches may have poor qualifications needed to understand the principles, concepts and phenomena involved with the responsibility of a reviewer. It may be unwise to list reviewers in our journals.
We as a profession should not be satisfied with the present state of journalism. We could mention many instances of where inaccuracies have been published. It is hoped that this narrative will be seriously considered, and that our leaders will consider ways to improve the accuracy of our literature.
Return to the Index of Articles
Return to Dr. Schudy's Home Page
site design by web designs of houston
powered by triplecrown server at 
virtual servers for business on the web