What's less damaging: glass ionomer or composite fillings?

[CholoMama]

Just wondering what people's thoughts are regards which of these two options are least damaging. Last time the dentist put in glass ionomer and it apparently remineralized my daughter's tooth and fell out, and when checked a year later the decay had hardened. I was so happy with that outcome, until I found out glass ionomers have fluoride in them. Or, the composite filling, is that preferable? Someone mentioned they have formaldehyde in them, yikes!!!

Are there any more options? Can cavities in young children be left? How do you judge if you can leave them or if you must have them filled?

We are making the necessary dietary changes.

I'd be grateful for people's input on this.

Thanks, Vanessa

[SleeplessMommy]

Glass ionomer cement is a temp filling material. If you are lucky, it will stay in place until the tooth is shed.

Composites are considered permanent filling materials. If you really don't want to use composite, you can ask for a ceramic or gold filling $$$. Or a stainless steel crown, if there is extensive decay. My kid has one SS crown and one composite in "baby teeth"

Dental sealants are usually composite.

Just a reminder: amalgam filling = "silver colored filling" = 50% mercury:
Some dentists in the US will still place these in kids, unless they are told not to. Many dentists will still place these in adults, even women of childbearing age. : Always ask first.

[kaPOW!]

I'd go with the glass ionomer, personally. As you discovered, it can help remineralize the tooth. I've heard Really good things about it. And if you're picking between two questionable substances, why not choose the one with a benefit.