21–30 of 163 posts
I hope someone works on recovering UOX (Urate Oxidase)[1] gene resurrection. It disappeared in one of our predessors making us prone to gout and excessive fat deposition[2]. Recovering this gene will treat both at the same time. [1] https://www.genecards.org/cgi-bin/carddisp.pl?gene=UOX [2] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41366-019-0487-9
So in a few decades I might have a choice between dentures or tooth regrowth? That'll be nice if it happens.
Maybe not that long. I'm 41 and have dentures. 18% of people 33-45 have them. 3% of people 18-33 have dentures. I've got a full denture with implant posts on the top, and a partial on the bottom. It's not just a "given" that teeth will hold out till retirement age.
So in a few decades I might have a choice between dentures or tooth regrowth? That'll be nice if it happens.
Maybe not that long. I'm 41 and have dentures. 18% of people 33-45 have them. 3% of people 18-33 have dentures. I've got a full denture with implant posts on the top, and a partial on the bottom. It's not just a "given" that teeth will hold out till retirement age.
I hope someone works on recovering UOX (Urate Oxidase)[1] gene resurrection. It disappeared in one of our predessors making us prone to gout and excessive fat deposition[2]. Recovering this gene will treat both at the same time. [1] https://www.genecards.org/cgi-bin/carddisp.pl?gene=UOX [2] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41366-019-0487-9
Well, not to say that evolution is perfect by any means, but I feel like genetics are very complex and reintroducing that gene could have other side effects.
> They found, with animal studies, that suppressing the gene USAG-1 by using its antibody can efficiently lead to tooth growth. And we're sure that suppressing USAG-1 (uterine sensitization associated gene-1) is safe? Since this has "uterine sensitization" in it, it seems like it may affect more than teeth! Just from a quick glance, this says its involved in pregnancy. > Given the remarkably tight restriction of its…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know you're joking but theres actually people who would pray for a treatment exactly like this. The elderly in particular. Over time all your teeth go. When I'm 60 I wouldnt mind them just ripping them all out if I could regrow them in 3 months.
Wouldn't they fall out like baby teeth do if new teeth grow under to push them out?
> They found, with animal studies, that suppressing the gene USAG-1 by using its antibody can efficiently lead to tooth growth. And we're sure that suppressing USAG-1 (uterine sensitization associated gene-1) is safe? Since this has "uterine sensitization" in it, it seems like it may affect more than teeth! Just from a quick glance, this says its involved in pregnancy. > Given the remarkably tight restriction of its…
There's the possibility that localized suppression would be possible. Even if not, any scientists working on this will be well aware to check for potential health complications before human testing was even started.
Something like "growing teeth" is more obvious than many outcomes. But the safety issues may not be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know you're joking but theres actually people who would pray for a treatment exactly like this. The elderly in particular. Over time all your teeth go. When I'm 60 I wouldnt mind them just ripping them all out if I could regrow them in 3 months.
Wouldn't they fall out like baby teeth do if new teeth grow under to push them out?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe not that long. I'm 41 and have dentures. 18% of people 33-45 have them. 3% of people 18-33 have dentures. I've got a full denture with implant posts on the top, and a partial on the bottom. It's not just a "given" that teeth will hold out till retirement age.
Perhaps this is a regional variation of English but here in the US I've never heard anybody refer to non-removal dental implants as dentures before.