Live data from Hacker News

Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

lanternbioworks.com

71–80 of 312 posts

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#71
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just EU, Switzerland too. That tells me everything I need to know, the site owner simply wants to steal my personal data and use it against me.

Surely that’s the reason and not the EU penalty for simply storing cookies “without consent” being so severe as to practically negate the value of EU citizens on the internet.

There's no reason for that site to use cookies in the first place.

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#72
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tooth decay or brain and liver damage? Or reducing sugar?

Our body can assimilate 1 Alcoholic Unit per day without any problems. I doubt those bacteria would produce anything in that order of magnitude so I truly don't understand your reply. Did you just blindly write: "alcohol therefore bad"?

Not sure why this was downvoted. The dose makes the poison here

>The average human digestive system produces approximately 3 g of ethanol per day through fermentation of its contents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_metabolism

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#73
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just EU, Switzerland too. That tells me everything I need to know, the site owner simply wants to steal my personal data and use it against me.

Surely that’s the reason and not the EU penalty for simply storing cookies “without consent” being so severe as to practically negate the value of EU citizens on the internet.

There's a lot more nuance to the GDPR. It's perfectly possible to use cookies and not need a banner. Our industry's use of banners is just a passive aggressive reaction to being told to respect our users.

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#74
I can see how this would have trouble attracting development funding. If your product is successful, people need one dose, ever. After some number have bought it the natural spread is likely to wipe out the rest of the market. It might be "pirated" with a kiss or a shared lollipop?

Against that, you have the entire dental industry, an established market of i dunno how much per year but substantial. They're already well versed in selling people intangibles packaged with inert ingredients. They've got a long history of "science to order" (9 out of 10 dentists agree!). They've got a large body of known sadists to call on for the less civil dispute resolution processes they might choose to employ.

I salute the folks behind this effort. Even if its all fairy dust you've put your lives on the line.

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#75
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just EU, Switzerland too. That tells me everything I need to know, the site owner simply wants to steal my personal data and use it against me.

Surely that’s the reason and not the EU penalty for simply storing cookies “without consent” being so severe as to practically negate the value of EU citizens on the internet.

At this point, isn't consent compliance a solved problem? That they can't find a canned solution to suit their needs is eyebrow-raising.

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#76
post #52

Charging $20,000 for a dose? Really?

What’s a fair price? Spending well over $20k on dental work over a lifetime is easy for many people. Adjust for inflation and it’s a steal. Cavities often lead to eventual root canals which require a crown which one day will probably require an extraction and a dental post and prosthetic tooth. That is probably around $8k or more for a single tooth at todays rates.

The time-value of money means the adjustment goes the other way. $20k is absolutely insane. That’s three times the cost of a full orthodontic treatment. They’ll get a handful of customers, if that.

$2k is more likely as a price point for mass adoption.

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#77
They have a pitch deck lamenting 90% of US adults have cavities, and they are 2x likely to get untreated if you are poor, then propose to market this for 20k$/dose. Saving the world, again, startup style.

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#78
post #69

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…

I'm 40 years old. Never had cavities.

I eat plenty of sugar.

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#79

Doing a couple Google/Twitter searches for this company it's pretty obvious it's coming out of the Berkeley-area EA/rationalist cluster, which automatically makes me pretty skeptical. These people don't exactly have a stellar track record of medical startups (recall all the hype around MetaMed, which delivered precisely nothing).

[dead]

Re: Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria

#80
The FDA requirements for the original clinical trial were wild: "...the FDA required them to find a cohort of 300 healthy 18-30 year olds who lived alone, not near a school zone, and had fully removable teeth."

I can see why this makes sense, but no wonder they failed at enrolling the cohort.

Post reply on HN