Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

lanternbioworks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 312 posts

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#61

Post by dehrmann »

dgrin91 wrote: post #56

The question I always have with this type of stuff is: why is it not _already_ huge. Cavities were a big thing already in 1985. If this was a miracle cure in 1985 then I do not believe that this study would have ended in 'ok that was fun, back to normal life'. This has huge commercial potential if true, so the apparently implications is that there is something blocking that commercial application. Was it FDA? Was it…

Don't want to get too conspiratorial, but dentists make their money on cavities, not cleanings.

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#62

Post by eqvinox »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #43
apsec112 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amounts produced are tiny. See the safety FAQ here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mDJCTO2QySmQOZQcajYReDCA...

The quantities are too small to make you drunk, but does it increase your risk of mouth cancer to have this in your mouth all day every day?

Better question: do any increased risks from this outweigh the risks incurred from poorer dental health and procedures to address these? (particularly at high age)?

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#64

Post by bhauer »

teddyh wrote: post #10

> stuck in patent hell […] for decades Patents only last for 20 years.

So a patent that predates their work could, at most, frustrate them for 20 years, or two decades. I have no idea who these guys are or what patents they're referring to, but the use of the word "decades" here is not obviously deceptive.

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#65

Post by apsec112 »

dgrin91 wrote: post #56

The question I always have with this type of stuff is: why is it not _already_ huge. Cavities were a big thing already in 1985. If this was a miracle cure in 1985 then I do not believe that this study would have ended in 'ok that was fun, back to normal life'. This has huge commercial potential if true, so the apparently implications is that there is something blocking that commercial application. Was it FDA? Was it…

The average time from scientific discovery to commercial success in biotech is measured in decades. Barry Werth's book The Antidote goes into why it's so slow and complicated: https://www.amazon.com/Antidote-Inside-World-New-Pharma/dp/1...

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#66

Post by anjel »

smileysteve wrote: post #21

Probiora seems similar, but less sticky (it recommends a daily dissolvable tablet instead a once a decade tablet) and instead of producing ethanol, produces hydrogen peroxide. https://probiorahealth.com/product/probiora/

Oral bacteria are a complex system of delicate balance. There are second-order effects that can arise which undermine the benefits of the first-order effects. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/324621

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#67

Post by danpalmer »

teddyh wrote: post #10

> stuck in patent hell […] for decades Patents only last for 20 years.

Technically yes, but there are caveats to this. Drug companies regularly create new variants with no distinguishing characteristics but which reset the patent clock, using litigation, trademarks, secrets, and other tactics to prevent the original variants being used.

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#69

Post by fdye »

So within the existing population today there exist individuals who essentially never get cavities. The hypothesis for this has been 1. they don't eat sugar, or only fibrous foods, etc. 2. They have a genetic difference that builds stronger enamel or similar.

I have never heard of anyone discussing bacteria in the mouth as a possible difference. Be interested to see if there is a natural strand that some people have present that could also be a culprit.

There has been modest support for this concept in term of gut bacteria, i.e. thin people who donate their excrement to fat people seem to inoculate them with a gut biome that helps them lose weight, or deal with digestive issues.

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#70

Post by midnitewarrior »

> "to produce ethanol instead of cavity-causing lactic acid"

So, brush your teeth and have ethanol in your mouth forever? I'm curious if this would be of high enough concentrations to show up on a breathalyzer, or if it would cause problems for people in recovery from alcohol or drugs.

Post reply on HN