In 1972, Dr. Arne Bjork et al published an article reporting the results of his research of metallic implant studies. This article, published in the AJO, was entitled "Facial Development and Tooth Eruption: An Implant Study at the Age of Puberty." This article was widely received worldwide. For twenty-five years it was the Bible for facial and jaw growth. Nobody questioned its validity.

In February 1996, Fred Schudy published an article in the AJO questioning Bjork's interpretation of the findings. The article was entitled "Superimposition and Structural Analysis." In this article Schudy stated that the S-N superimposition expresses an accurate account of all growth activity both vertically and horizontally in the facial complex. Then when the implant studies report more growth of the condyles (20.4 mm in case no. 14) than the S-N superimposition reports (11 mm) then this leads to disturbing confusion. This state of confusion needs to be resolved.

So far only one individual in the USA has been willing to express an opinion one way or the other. In the ensuing year since the publication of the article by Schudy, there have been no published comments in the USA.

That individual, in a personal communication speaking of the discussion of the implant studies, stated, "I agree with you on the S-N. I never did like the implants as created landmarks. Mandibles do not resorb as implant indicate." Several of our outstanding leaders have declined offering their opinions. Those in a position of top echelon leadership should feel an obligation to express their opinions.

It is hoped that members of our field of endeavor will come forth and give us their opinions.

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