Sir, I write to comment on the news article Oldest recorded case of impacted wisdom teeth (BDJ 2006; 200: 311). It is stated that the radiograph of a female illustrating the item shows an impacted wisdom tooth. Various deductions are then made from this bit of evidence as to the age of the person and to the effect of her diet.

The wisdom tooth shown is not impacted. It is merely unerupted and developing. It is not in contact with the second molar anterior to it. The crown is fully formed and the root is just beginning to show some calcification.

Third molars (wisdom teeth) are the least useful for estimating age as they have the greatest variability in development and eruption. The apex of the second molar appears to have closed suggesting a lower age of 15 years. The wisdom tooth development suggests an age between 15-17 years. The original conclusion that she was a 'girl' rather than a young woman of between 25 and 30 years old was much nearer the mark. The latter age estimation, based on a misinterpretation of the radiograph, is most unlikely to be correct.

The scientists at the Field Museum, where the jaw is retained, will be able to use visual clues such as attrition etc, to estimate her age and reconcile them with the important radiological evidence.