Ferris Jabr, in an extremely well researched and written piece for The Atlantic:
Whereas a typical dentist might perform root canals on previously crowned teeth in only 3 to 7 percent of cases, Lund was performing them in 90 percent of cases. As Zeidler later alleged in court documents, Lund had performed invasive, costly, and seemingly unnecessary procedures on dozens and dozens of patients, some of whom he had been seeing for decades.
It’s easy to see how dentists, hoping to buoy their income, would be tempted to recommend frequent exams and proactive treatments—a small filling here, a new crown there—even when waiting and watching would be better.
When you’re a hammer, the world is your nail. I’ve had my fair share of unnecessary medical work. To this day, I’m extremely skeptical of any proposal from any doctor, especially when there is no perceived problem or pain and the issue is discovered on a routine checkup. There is a significant and inherent conflict of interest when consumers don’t have the ability to understand the recommendations and repercussions of the medical work proposed to them by private doctors whose income is intrinsically linked to the number of procedures performed.