Use of Cat 3 carcinogens

NamaNama
edited August 2018 in Coatings, transdermals, other implants

I wanted to have an open discussion about the use of class 3 carcinogens in implants.
Hopefully this can be constructive...

The basis for the discussion is that the following class 3 carcinogens are already used in popular resins for the dental industry:

methyl methacrylate
butylated hydroxytoluene
hydroquinone
dibenzoyl peroxide
silicon dioxide

If the dentist doesn't mind sticking it in my mouth, how much should I care sticking it in my arm?
How different is it being in my mouth 24/7 to being under my skin 24/7?
Should we generalize and reject anything not specifically class 4?
Do we even reject Cat 4?

Dental resins are designed to be hard, crush resistant and not subject to hydrolytic degradation. In theory they would be good materials to test with for implanting, but what are the risks involved?

Comments

  • CassoxCassox
    Ok, but you have to look at the specifics of how these materials are used. Methyl methacrylate is the monomer for another totally biocompatible and non toxic material. The stuff is then cross linked together. After this, there shouldnt be any exposure or next to zero.
  • NamaNama

    thx @Cassox I can try to read more about that.

    It seems also the type of exposure plays a factor, silicon dioxide can be ingested safely but when inhaled can cause lung cancer. It would lead me to think its ok for implantation.

    butylated hydroxytoluene is speculative so it gets defaulted to Cat3?

    hydroquinone seems to have genuine concerns raised by some studies.

    It's a bit hard to understand without a chemistry background. A MSDS sheet will list the individual chemicals but the final product might not contain the chemical in its original form... but that part is not explained.

  • CassoxCassox
    Generally speaking, if it's a carcinogen it shouldn't be used. I'm not familiar with all the substances bring discussed, but it doesnt really matter if it's used in dentistry or not. Amalgram fillings are full of nasty stuff and we have better options.
  • HunterHunter
    Your saying sand causes cancer?
  • NamaNama

    @Hunter causes microcuts , but not the common brown sand you see on the beach. It's the fine white sand. I have a bag of it for mixing tile grout. When you pour it powder floats into the air.

    Wiki:
    "Inhaling finely divided crystalline silica dust can lead to silicosis, bronchitis, or lung cancer, as the dust becomes lodged in the lungs and continuously irritates the tissue, reducing lung capacities.[38] When fine silica particles are inhaled in large enough quantities (such as through occupational exposure), it increases the risk of systemic autoimmune diseases such as lupus[39] and rheumatoid arthritis compared to expected rates in the general population.[40]"

  • HunterHunter
    > @Nama said:
    > @Hunter causes microcuts , but not the common brown sand you see on the beach. It's the fine white sand. I have a bag of it for mixing tile grout. When you pour it powder floats into the air.
    >
    > Wiki:
    > "Inhaling finely divided crystalline silica dust can lead to silicosis, bronchitis, or lung cancer, as the dust becomes lodged in the lungs and continuously irritates the tissue, reducing lung capacities.[38] When fine silica particles are inhaled in large enough quantities (such as through occupational exposure), it increases the risk of systemic autoimmune diseases such as lupus[39] and rheumatoid arthritis compared to expected rates in the general population.[40]"

    I know all that, but as a carcinogenic coating?
    It would be a solid layer.
  • NamaNama
    @Hunter as a solid coating it sounds reasonable to me and I haven't found information saying otherwise yet.

    Most of the risk is that the resins I found are sold as a powder that needs to be mixed with a liquid. So you have the initial chance of exposure, but thats what suba gear is for.

    hydroquinone is the one I'm most curious about now.
Sign In or Register to comment.