Tetracycline baby 1960

Latest post 03-19-2014 11:46 PM by Taxagent. 22 replies.
  • 02-23-2009 5:58 PM

    • red46
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on 02-23-2009
    • Posts 2

    Question [=?] Tetracycline baby 1960

    As a child in the 60's I suffered severe ear infections and was prescribed Tetracycline antibiotic which resulted in discoloration of my permanent teeth. (gray and yellow striping) In 1994 I had vaneers put on my upper teeth at the cost of $600.00 per tooth. At that time I was informed by the dentist that I would have to replace the veneers in approx. 15 years. Due to normal wear and tear it is now time to have them replaced. The amount per tooth has doubled since 1994 and I am uable to afford the cost to have them replaced.

    Is there any record of similar claims where compensation was provided to children affected by tetracycline discoloration in the 1960's?
  • 02-23-2009 9:53 PM In reply to

    re: Tetracycline baby 1960

    Hi there -

    You may want to read the following website:


    There are some citations listed that may be of benefit to you. One problem may be that that tooth staining side effect might not have been well known in 1960 as the first warnings did not appear until 1971 in the PDR and it wasn't until 1963 that the staining issue became more widely known. Of note, it appears that the judgement listed above was for Declomycin.

    Good luck!
  • 02-23-2009 11:05 PM In reply to

    • red46
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on 02-23-2009
    • Posts 2

    Ok [+0+] re: Tetracycline baby 1960

    Thank you for the response...it is much appreciated....I will take a look!
  • 03-01-2009 10:27 PM In reply to

    • SHavas
    • Not Ranked
    • Joined on 03-02-2009
    • WI
    • Posts 1

    Re: re: Tetracycline baby 1960

    Hello -- My teeth have also been affected by Declomycin and, being somewhat naive about legal issues, don't quite understand what I can do with the information above. How would I go about applying the citations mentioned in the above post? It seems to me as though the prescribing doctor would seem to be liable for such damages based on what I saw in a quick skim of the website; however, I was born in 1963 and the doctor (my mother's obstetrician) has passed away. Am I out of luck or is there some other recourse I can take to recoup some of the thousands of dollars I've spent on restoring my teeth over the past 45 years? Please let me know where to go from here...any advice is welcome. Thanks!&... - Sue

  • 03-02-2009 7:14 PM In reply to

    Re: re: Tetracycline baby 1960

    If you went to the link Matt 1972 provided, the physicians involved were found not to have committed malpractice.

  • 03-21-2009 3:31 PM In reply to

    Re: re: Tetracycline baby 1960

    As Paddywakk pointed out, the doctors were found not liable for the issue. I'm sorry I failed to mention that in my original response. You need the read the finding closely as the timing of the notification when docs were aware vs when you were treated might come into play.


    Good luck.

  • 12-05-2009 3:45 AM In reply to

    Re: re: Tetracycline baby 1960

    If you have tetracycline damage and were born during the 1960's, you might be a pingie. Please take this seriously; it will be proven within the year. I was impinged in April of 1966, at sixteen months of age. The project had its development and epicenter in the Valley Forge region of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, but went national to a lesser extent. From 1960 to 1970, 35,000 infants were impinged,  25,000 of which are still living today.

     The FDA was aware of the damage caused to teeth by tetracycline before 1960, but doctors were kept unaware and encouraged to prescibe the drug. If it weren't for tetracycline, only pingies would have discolored and malformed teeth. Tetracycline was deliberately balamed as the cover syndrome, so that there would be no isolated group of children who would all test positive for a series of additional health problems. I have written a book about my life as a pingie, entitled, "You Might Be a Pingie". The book chronicles my attempts at searching for medical treatment and explains impingement in detail. The book is available through Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble.com. It is also available in India and the UK. Please search the title on google for addditonal information and related threads. I would not joke about something as serious as the lives of 35,000 infants and the destruction caused to their families. This is an extremely serious and sensative topic, please believe me that I am not kidding. My publisher felt that an autobiography of an obscure 44 year old televison producer would sound sophmoric to most, and so we have marketed the book as science fiction. It won't be the first science fiction book to become accepted as truth, but it will be the first to do so within one year. Please don't pay cash for dental verneers, I haven't, and I suggest that you wait one year. You'll be glad you did.Ok

  • 12-10-2009 9:00 AM In reply to

    Re: re: Tetracycline baby 1960

    I'm surprised that no one has anything more to say on the topic; this is huge.

  • 12-10-2009 9:16 AM In reply to

    Re: re: Tetracycline baby 1960

    You resurected a post that is six months or more old.  The original poster likely has not come back.  As to the reference to your book:  spam is prohibited as well as self promotion according to the TOS.  We deal with the law here not science fiction.  I am positive that is why no one is willing to discuss this with you.

    "That's just my opinion, then again I might be wrong."  Dennis Miller


  • 12-10-2009 11:34 PM In reply to

    Re: re: Tetracycline baby 1960

    I'm just trying to help people with tetracycline damage. It is an indicator. If a person has that affliction, they may also have an associated syndrome, which I have identified in my book.  Science fiction often becomes factual. It usually takes about fifty years for that to happen, but the information in my book will be accepted as fact within two years. Why should those who have tetracycline damage pay for new crowns when the damage was caused by the department of defense in conjunction with the FDA? Should these unfortunate people have to suffer for two more years until my thesis is proven? According to you, yes. Now I see why this case is still unsolved; because of small minded thinking. You accuse me of spamming? I'm trying to help people. You say that I'm kicking a dead thread? Well, I'm trying to wake it back up, because new information has arisen. Do you object? Why is that? Possibly because your thinking has been curtailed by a long-term propagandic approach to the topic.

  • 12-10-2009 11:40 PM In reply to

    Re: re: Tetracycline baby 1960

    "Should these unfortunate people have to suffer for two more years until my thesis is proven?"

    In your post on 12/5/09 you said your theory would be proven in a year.  Now today you say two years.  What happened in six days that your theory that alien experimentation and government conspiracy is responsible for a pharmaceutical side effect will double the amount of time to prove it? 

    Quite frankly you are just a garden variety nut who got the penny press to print their mental illness fueled delusions and are now trying to pass it off as facts.  Not what this site is for.  Go back to the alien abduction sites for this kind of discussion.

    "That's just my opinion, then again I might be wrong."  Dennis Miller


  • 12-11-2009 12:12 AM In reply to

    Re: re: Tetracycline baby 1960

    It's interesting to see how much you hate what I'm saying, but it is the truth. I will gladly go away; no point in taking any more of your abuse. Science fiction usually takes fifty years before it becomes reality, if it does at all. In my case, it will take two years. Maybe only one. If that discrepancy is all it takes for you to jump up and down screaming, you couldn't be a very good attourne. I certainly would not want you on my side in court, that's for sure. You'd turn the court against us both with your lack of charisma and your fascination with minutia.

  • 12-11-2009 12:29 AM In reply to

    Re: re: Tetracycline baby 1960

    Please close my account and drop my connection. I'm not an attourney and we aren't in court, there was no reason for you to have jumped down my throat like that. I was trying to help people have the same problem as me, which is the function of the book. It's not worth being picked apart word for word by a prosecutor such as yourself. And please, don't send me a bill for the service which you have just provided.

    I find it interesting that your legal degree entitles you to make a medical diagnosis. Does every law degree include a liscense to practice medicine as well? A good therapist might be able to help you with your compulsion to analyze people.

  • 12-12-2009 2:40 AM In reply to

    Re: Tetracycline baby 1960

    hi I was give tetracycline in my last trimester of pregnancy for a bacteria infection that I never had  the stupid doctor did not relize that my water was braking and thought I had in infection so she assumed it was an infection an basicaly told me i needed to take the med to protect my baby from contracting any thing at child birth, I had asked if it was safe for me to take and she told me yes. At 3months my daugther started cutting teeth i noticed that they were discolored at a dentist visit for myself an my son I asked the dentist if it was normal he advised me to just brush her teeth with the baby swab an she should be fine, this is not the case now that she is 13months and at her one year visit i asked her doctor about her teeth and he asked me if i took any med while pregnant at first i could not think of anything but i started thinking back an that was the only thing beside getting an epi while in labor i also had an epi with my first born an his teeth are perfect, I am discusted with all that i have been reading and this doctor should have known better than to prescribe this med knowing the side effect will my daughter have to live with this for the rest of her life or will her permenant teeth come in fine what do I do. I just want to cry my girl has a beautiful smile and it makes me upset to think that she may not want to smile when she gets older if her teeth are discolored like this. also her top teeth has not dropped fully and she uses only her bottum teeth when eating food, she does not cry but is this effecting her eating. I am so mad I should have followed my instincts and not taken the med  theres so many things that happened from her birth that i wonder if this was the cause and what to expect when she gets older. sincerly a concerned mom.

Page 1 of 2 (23 items) 1 2 Next > | RSS

My Community

Community Membership New Users: Search Community