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

151–160 of 160 posts

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#151

Post by depsypher »

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…

I've been using a mouthwash with xylitol for around 5 years now and haven't had a cavity in that time. I hadn't heard about any concern with ingesting xylitol before reading this thread, but I imagine if it's a problem, a mouthwash would be a good way to avoid ingesting much.

The product I've been using is this: https://carifree.com/product/maintenance-rinse/

Also it's alkaline in ph, unlike many mouthwashes on the market. Caries need an acidic environment to do their thing, so you want your mouth to be inhospitable to them. Acidic mouthwashes may kill off the bacteria, but they make it a nice environment for any that remain to attach your teeth.

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#152

Post by mrguyorama »

NoImmatureAdHom wrote: post #147
mrguyorama wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'm pretty sure using "biased" to denigrate other people is over, Gretchen. Your username is literally "NoImmatureAdHom"

[flagged]

I was referring to calling them "gretchen"

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#153

Post by novia »

FeloniousHam wrote: post #119
jkingsman wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotal +1. I've switched to non-SLS toothpaste and seen a dramatic drop in my frequency and severity of apthous ulcers (and, unfortunately, I get them often enough and badly enough that I can state causality with some certainty). I used to have a (powerful-to-the-point-of-personal-uneasiness) corticosteroid that I would put on them to dubious effect, but I haven't needed to resort to that at all since I switched a…

BTW, the best treatment I've found for canker sores is Canker Cover. I switched baking soda toothpaste, but I'm not convinced it had a material effect.

Kanka is better imo

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#154

Post by seventyone »

green-in-gold wrote: post #141
seventyone wrote: post #113

I guess I am going to die from making my own kombucha, kefir, and yogurt because the FDA isn't regulating it. WHAT IF... the mass increase in colon cancers in young people is due to gut bacteria colonies being taken over by a strain of bacteria in mouths that also survives stomach acids? What if that is causing the huge increase in IBS? What if the high carb diets and alternative sugars being consumed at mind bogglin…

You may know this, but DIY fecal transplants are supposedly very doable

yeah I recall this article about it

https://undark.org/2018/11/08/my-diy-fecal-transplant/

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#156

Post by Ferret7446 »

russdill wrote: post #30
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…

Just to be clear, it's not that it's not good for them, it's highly toxic

Isn't that the definition of "toxic"?

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#157

Post by dekhn »

milesvp wrote: post #94
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…

Please be careful pushing xylitol, "sugar alcohols" are neither a sugar or an alcohol. This, of course, is exactly the thing that makes them desirable as a sweetener substitute, the body doesn't really know what to do with the stuff, and, presumably, neither do common mouth bacteria. Sugar alcohols are known for causing digestive troubles, for this very reason, with the most notorious example being the Haribo "sugar…

xylitol is a sugar and an alcohol- byt the classic organic chemistry definition. I'm not sure why you'd make that point.

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#158

Post by callalex »

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…

“Plan” is a strong word for what’s going on here. They don’t even have successful clinical trials.

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#159

Post by callalex »

somenameforme wrote: post #55
ceejayoz wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

How's the glow on those petunias in pitch black? Those look absolutely amazing and the ad is hilarious enough to make me want to pick some up.

I live in the hills of the Bay Area and the light pollution is too great outside for them to be obviously bright unless it’s been a really nice weather day (the parts that are growing are the parts that glow which is fascinating!). Outside, you can tell they look different than other plants if you are told they are different and you really take the time to look. Inside with all the lights off, they definitely make you say WOW!. They’re similar to the old “Indiglo” watch faces of the 90’s. You will not be able to see them glowing even in dim room lighting, the lights must be off.

All that being said, I am still quite happy with them! They take effort to be observed, but that effort is rewarding since it is such a unique experience. It’s really neat to see a stem glowing one night, which indicates that the next night there will be a new bright flower bud. Also I get a huge kick out of doing everything I can to propagate them, since it is stupidly illegal to do so.

Edit: for something comparable that you are familiar with, I would say it would take 6-8 plants at the size they arrive at to make the equivalent amount of light as a single small tea candle.

Re: Reasons not to take Lumina's anticavity probiotic

#160

Post by ivansavz »

ivansavz wrote: post #80
buildsjets wrote: post #68

Relating to fluoride's effect on bacterial biofilm - There are several different kinds of fluoride available in toothpaste, and they do not all have the same efficacy against bacterial plaque. Stannous fluoride is considerably more effective than sodium fluoride or sodium monofluorophosphate, but you may need to pay a small amount more for it and actually read the packaging to find it. It's hard to find a website dis…

Very interesting. From that paper, the brand they used as example of stannous fluoride was "oral-B pro expert all-around protection" Do you know of any other brands? I wonder if we can conclude it was the stannous fluoride that made the difference and one of the other ingredients.

Update: I went to the drug store and is seems "stannous fluoride" is quite common in Crest brand toothpastes. All the "high-end" toothpastes had it, so it's not a rare thing at all, just have to read the medical ingredients as you said.
Post reply on HN