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

Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

trevorklee.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 160 posts

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#31

Post by SamBam »

pragma_x wrote: post #27
maxbond wrote: post #8

Whenever this topic comes up on HN it strikes me as bizarre that anyone thinks they can genetically modify a bacteria, release it into the wild - and that it'll stay genetically modified? Like the author mentions, bacteria are constantly swapping genes via horizontal gene transfer. Surely the bacteria in our mouths have found the optimal metabolism for their environment? Why wouldn't we expect our genetically modifie…

> and that it'll stay genetically modified? I honestly think the play here is to have customers continually inoculate with the same, or even improved, versions of their modified bacteria. Possibly with a very strong antibiotic course in between if a clean slate is needed. That would provide ample room to stay on top of mutations and gene swapping in-situ. Otherwise, you don't have a continuous revenue model or a succ…

But how do your re-inoculations colonize the teeth that have been fully colonized by your now-mutated old strains? Is the plan to require a full antibiotic mouthwash every few days, and then fresh inoculation? Ugh.

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#33

Post by SamBam »

ceejayoz wrote: post #28
maxbond wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough but I do feel like our everyday experience with biology informs this. If you cultivate a certain color of rose and release it into the wild, you wouldn't expect that color to persist, right? Maybe I'm out of touch but I feel like that's intuitive. Maybe the technology is sexy and dazzling and that makes it more difficult to engage critically.

Depends on the plant. I've got two GMO plants in my house right now; glow-in-the-dark petunias ( https://light.bio/ ) and purple tomatoes ( https://www.norfolkhealthyproduce.com/ ). The tomatoes breed true (i.e. the seeds have the gene); the petunias do not and must be cloned via propagation. Roses, fruit trees, etc. are the latter.

The tomatoes will only breed true so long as they are hand-bred or kept in an environment where no other types of tomatoes are around. And even then mutations will eventually creep in.

Same goes with the bacteria, except you may be talking about days or weeks instead of years.

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#34

Post by swatcoder »

maxbond wrote: post #8

Whenever this topic comes up on HN it strikes me as bizarre that anyone thinks they can genetically modify a bacteria, release it into the wild - and that it'll stay genetically modified? Like the author mentions, bacteria are constantly swapping genes via horizontal gene transfer. Surely the bacteria in our mouths have found the optimal metabolism for their environment? Why wouldn't we expect our genetically modifie…

There are obviously numerous locally-optimal strategies for bacterial colonies in one's mouth (and gut, etc) as the population of bacteria varies widely across individual people.

That's not to suggest that knocking out one or two specific functions is going to accomplish recolonization, or that we should even trust the effort to be wise in the medium-/long-term in light of gene transfer or migration into the gut and elsewhere, but the broad idea of pursuing recolonization by less destructive bacteria isn't without merit in itself.

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#35

Post by maxbond »

ceejayoz wrote: post #28
maxbond wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough but I do feel like our everyday experience with biology informs this. If you cultivate a certain color of rose and release it into the wild, you wouldn't expect that color to persist, right? Maybe I'm out of touch but I feel like that's intuitive. Maybe the technology is sexy and dazzling and that makes it more difficult to engage critically.

Depends on the plant. I've got two GMO plants in my house right now; glow-in-the-dark petunias ( https://light.bio/ ) and purple tomatoes ( https://www.norfolkhealthyproduce.com/ ). The tomatoes breed true (i.e. the seeds have the gene); the petunias do not and must be cloned via propagation. Roses, fruit trees, etc. are the latter.

But those aren't really in the wild, right? They're in your garden? If they were left to their own devices and started to breed with wild type tomatoes, and/or were subject to selective pressures for an extended period, they probably would either abandon the gene or discover a niche it was adaptive for?

Glow in the dark petunias sound really cool, I want those.

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#36

Post by teeray »

maxbond wrote: post #8

Whenever this topic comes up on HN it strikes me as bizarre that anyone thinks they can genetically modify a bacteria, release it into the wild - and that it'll stay genetically modified? Like the author mentions, bacteria are constantly swapping genes via horizontal gene transfer. Surely the bacteria in our mouths have found the optimal metabolism for their environment? Why wouldn't we expect our genetically modifie…

> I imagine that you could, at least on paper, create a Rube Goldberg machine in their genes that, say, killed them if they produced lactic acid

It’s like Jurassic Park’s “Lysine Contingency”, but in your mouth

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#37

Post by nikolay »

SkyMarshal wrote: post #17

A simpler alternative is xylitol. Not a drug, no FDA approval required. It's a plant-based sweetener that cavity-causing mouth bacteria love to ingest, but which provides no sustenance to them. It essentially fills them up and then causes them to starve them to death, helping maintain minimum mouth bacteria. No bacteria, no cavities. Get it in mints or gum like Zellies or PUR (the only two I've found that don't inclu…

Not just xylitol but also mastic gum, which, in addition to cavities prevention, kills H. pylori and strengthens your jaw muscles as it's a bit harder than regular chewing gum.

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#38

Post by nikolay »

SkyMarshal wrote: post #17

A simpler alternative is xylitol. Not a drug, no FDA approval required. It's a plant-based sweetener that cavity-causing mouth bacteria love to ingest, but which provides no sustenance to them. It essentially fills them up and then causes them to starve them to death, helping maintain minimum mouth bacteria. No bacteria, no cavities. Get it in mints or gum like Zellies or PUR (the only two I've found that don't inclu…

Also, recently there was a study that DIM also kills only the harmful bacteria in the mouth.

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#39

Post by SamBam »

deelowe wrote: post #5

I was hoping for a more thorough explanation for why this particular regimen is dangerous. Instead this is a rather lengthy essay which ultimately relies on the appeal to authority fallacy. Not to say I think people should just put random things into their bodies - It is indeed probably not the best idea. That said, I'm not sure I learned anything new after reading this.

Did you stop reading halfway through?

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#40

Post by polishdude20 »

maxbond wrote: post #8

Whenever this topic comes up on HN it strikes me as bizarre that anyone thinks they can genetically modify a bacteria, release it into the wild - and that it'll stay genetically modified? Like the author mentions, bacteria are constantly swapping genes via horizontal gene transfer. Surely the bacteria in our mouths have found the optimal metabolism for their environment? Why wouldn't we expect our genetically modifie…

On that note, I wonder how kissing affects our mouth bacteria. Like, does making out with someone transfer enough bacteria between the two people to make a difference?
Post reply on HN