This is the by now, very familiar Dental Chart of the Somerton Man, it was taken by Dr. Dwyer, the man who performed the autopsy on the man. The note on it clearly says that the numbered teeth are the missing teeth. The Somerton Man had 18 missing teeth.
Note that he didn't say extracted teeth nor did he say there was any gum disease, just missing teeth.
There is a term for this condition, where more than 6 teeth are missing it is known as 'OLIGODONTIA' a technical enough term and it refers to a genetic condition. Amazing fact that the % of those affected is estimated at between .1 % and .2%.
Some more interesting numbers, the average number of teeth a person retains in the 30 to 50 age group is 25. They start, as we all do with 32, take away the wisdom teeth which are seemingly, quite commonly removed. The Somerton Man at 43 or so years had lost 18, and 18 from 32 is just 14 teeth, well below the average.
Looking at the, yet to be proven Carl Webb, his images do not show a bunch of missing teeth, on the contrary, they look quite healthy. So we can fairly safely rule out a genetic issue. The question we now have is what causes a person to lose 18 teeth?
Dwyer and the other professionals who poured over the remains of the Somerton Man had nothing to offer by way of explanation save for the fact that he did not show signs of wearing dentures. So, no periodontal/gum disease was apparent.
Where does that leave us? When all else fails, ask an expert, a real one. I did that and he came back with the following in-depth and detailed discussion of one possible cause.
The Legacy of Early Uranium Efforts in Australia, 1906–1945: From Radium Hill to the Atomic Bomb and Today
Gavin M. Mudd
Institute of Sustainable Water Resources, Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Clayton, Vic. 3800, Australia.
A residential house, apparently in inner-suburban Adelaide, was discovered to be contaminated with radium in the early 1980s, the late resident having been a laboratory technician for radium production from Mount Painter in the 1920s (presumably at Dry Creek). The problem was identified after a ‘radium needle’ was found. One room where ‘some laboratory work’ was probably performed contained some 10 MBq of radium (~0.28 mg). It was concluded that the radium had been in solution and had been heated in the fireplace and spilled on the floor. The contamination data is given in Table 3. After cleaning the chimney and removal of the floorboards, the residual contamination was not thought to be a significant risk, and no further action was taken. The radioactive wastes were dumped at an unnamed ‘industrial waste disposal site’. The Dry Creek wastes were dumped at Radium Hill during this time though there are no data on the public record concerning waste volumes or level of radioactivity.
Passmore, ‘Radioactivity in a Private Residence’, Radiation Protection in Australia, 1(2) (1983), 52, 54;
O’Neil, Above and Below, p. 375. The dump site was most likely the radioactive waste facility at Radium Hill, gazetted in April 1981 though with no environmental impact assessment.
Contact us
ARPS Secretariat, PO Box 18, Mooroolbark Victoria 3138, Australia
In another case, whilst investigating and researching CSIR in the 1940s we came back with surprising results from an experiment at Fisherman's Bend. The experiment in question produced radioactive waste. Those who are familiar with the location will know that the whole site was scraped and 10000 Barrels of contaminated waste were removed. 1% or 100 barrels were identified and tested. That waste first went to Lucas Heights and then relocated to outback Australia in the 60s I believe but will check that.
It does seem possible that the Somerton Man was exposed to Radiation and that could only have been in the 1940s, excessive tooth loss is one of the side effects of such exposure.
Where does that leave us? We have no confirmed signs of gum disease, from photographs Carl Webb's teeth seem just fine which indicates that this was probably not a genetic issue.
We seem to be running out of options but I would surmise that there may be other causes that we should review.
Nobody knows that the dental chart
ReplyDeleteis the man on Somerton beach
We don't know what Dwyer was told or what he saw
or what happened with bodies
on the way to the morgue or in the morgue
This is the man from Somerton beach
It may not have been
It may have been a street drunk
without any identity on him
undernourished with teeth missing
West Terrace Cemetery is full of graves
with unknown persons in them
It was 1948
We just don't know
Wasn’t he a smoker? I know that heavy smoking could lead to tooth loss.I know tobacco use can cause the gums to recide(sorry for the typo).
ReplyDeleteYes, he was a smoker but there was no mention of any diseased gums, just missing teeth. Had the gums been diseased, they would have been mentioned given the experience and knowledge of Dr Dwyer. It would be wrong to simply assume that Dr Dwyer missed the diseased gums, once again that's confirmation bias. It ranks alongside Professor Abbots comment regarding the Anodontia issue which was proven to be wrong. Just take your time and ask yourself not what will fit your theory but what is most likely to be the truth of the matter.
DeleteSorry me again! I was checking around and it states that contact sports also cause toothloss and if it turns out for some weird reason that the Somerton man is Carl Webb that could explain why he had teeth missing when playing Football if he continued to do so in his later adulthood!
ReplyDeleteYes, contact sports can cause tooth loss but nowhere in the documentation regarding Professor Abbots claims or the statements made by the family will you find any mention of significant tooth loss or any tooth loss for that matter.
DeleteThe evidence as per the photographs is that when the family group. gathering pics were taken he appeared to have a fine set of teeth as far as could be seen. If there is evidence to the contrary then that's all good but none has been put forward.
Keep digging, if there is anything there you will eventually find it, if not, there'll come a point where you have to accept that there isn't any supporting evidence.
I don't want to put you off, I am just suggesting that you focus on what is the truth of the matter.
Its called the chain of custody, and the best evidence we have is that the man who was found on the beach is the same man that was identified to the Dr at the hospital where life was pronounced extinct, that this same body was identified to Dr Dwyer and Dr Dwyer made the dental chart from that man. I suggest that you read the autopsy and inquest reports thoroughly and you'll find that there is a chain of custody of the body. The man on whom the autopsy was performed and from the dental chart was taken was the Somerton Man. Form my perspective it seems that you are doiung as much as you can to modify the truth to suit your particular theory. It's called confirmation bias and its not meant to be unkind, its about getting to the truth. Over the years I would have had this same argument six or seven times at least. So, please read ALL the documentation thoroughly before diving in to unsupported assumptions territory.
ReplyDeleteDecember 1st this year is the 75th anniversary isn’t it? Are the police holding off for that?
ReplyDeleteIf you drop by the An Empty Glass wiki, you'll find a comprehensive account of the Carl Webb claims:
ReplyDeletehttps://anemptyglass.fandom.com/wiki/THE_CARL_WEBB_SAGA
It describes the very often complex issues faced by the Police forensics team. Whether the results will be known by December 1st is another question. The Coroner and the Police have significant workloads and a huge task ahead of them to clear them. The reality is that the Somerton Man case, whilst being a priority for those who follow the case, in the today's real world there are many more pressing cases to be resolved and we must wait until the Coroner reaches his conclusions in due course.
Just read the Carl Webb Saga on anemptyglass wikia. Wow! And again Wow! That covers the bases and then some, so many conflicting bits of evidence and unsubstantiated claims have been made. No way can anyone state that Webb was the man.
ReplyDeleteInteresting moment in the IEEE article by Professor Abbot regarding his involvement with the Voynich document. Now who else do we know in that same field?