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

Dyson CameraJet electric toothbrush

dyson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 143 posts

Re: Dyson CameraJet electric toothbrush

#121

Post by jhanschoo »

senectus1 wrote: post #108
mattlondon wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My dentist recommended the dental picks (which can be used multiple times) instead of tape/string. I find it a lot easier than trying to fit my hands on my mouth (especially the longer L-shaped picks)

i find the inconsistent advice from "Dentists" very discouraging. just like midwives they all seem to have their own opinions that dont equate to scientifically researched advice, yet are presented in a way that if you;re not paying attention will be taken as such.

It's also the case that different people have different mouths and habits and there is no one-size-fits-all solution, and the best option might be to try a variety of options and see what sticks for you.

Re: Dyson CameraJet electric toothbrush

#122

Post by IshKebab »

tedtimbrell wrote: post #7

Never been less satisfied than having bought a Dyson vacuum. Cheap plastic construction

Rubbish. All vacuums are plastic and Dysons actually use quite high quality plastic.

When I worked there they were always really worried about Shark, because apparently they have better pick-up benchmark scores. I bought one recently. Absolute trash. It has some bullshit automatic power control thing that is on by default but just varies the power completely randomly. So every time you turn it on it takes about 5 seconds - on, low power, high power finally. Vs the Dyson where you just pull a trigger.

Never again. Dysons are the best. Very expensive, but just buy the older models or refurbished.

Also don't bother with the hair drier or the cold fans. Not worth the price. The hot fans might be I guess.

Re: Dyson CameraJet electric toothbrush

#123

Post by seanmcdirmid »

IshKebab wrote: post #122
tedtimbrell wrote: post #7

Never been less satisfied than having bought a Dyson vacuum. Cheap plastic construction

Rubbish. All vacuums are plastic and Dysons actually use quite high quality plastic. When I worked there they were always really worried about Shark, because apparently they have better pick-up benchmark scores. I bought one recently. Absolute trash. It has some bullshit automatic power control thing that is on by default but just varies the power completely randomly. So every time you turn it on it takes about 5 sec…

I loved my Dyson but switched to Chinese robovacs because, even if stick vacs made cleaning the floor easy, I still sucked at consistency. Now I have three robot vacuums because my townhome is three floors.

Re: Dyson CameraJet electric toothbrush

#124

Post by yread »

On topic of dental innovation why isn't there a toothbrush with accelerator that would monitor which areas you've cleaned and where do you need to work more?

Or even better: a device (like dentures) that you put in your mouth, bite on it and it brushes all your teeth at once

Re: Dyson CameraJet electric toothbrush

#125

Post by Steve44 »

tedtimbrell wrote: post #7

Never been less satisfied than having bought a Dyson vacuum. Cheap plastic construction

My experience over the years.

Had a Miele about 30 years ago and it was very good. It died when someone tried to hoover up a spilt glass of water and the motor was going to cost as much as a new cleaner.

We've had a couple of Dysons. They are great; they clean very well, the variety of tools is great, and the connectors for the tubes & tools is easy and very secure. Mine were all mains powered.

Downsides to the Dyson is it needed emptying very often and that could also be quite messy. Possibly a combination being good at sucking up, and a comparatively small hopper/"bag". I stripped it down once as it seemed to be struggling to clean as well, the cyclone/jet engine was full of "dust" and some of it was caked on but after a good clean was as good as new.

Now got a Henry. The bag hardly ever needs changing, the cable is very long, and the tube is long. I don't think it picks up as well as the Dyson and the tools are fiddlier to use as they are all just push fit and also don't feel as good quality.

Yes Henry is very robust, can be easily repaired/maintained, and they just work; that is probably why they are used commercially and so well loved. I don't think it cleans anything like as well as the Dyson though.

Re: Dyson CameraJet electric toothbrush

#126

Post by jrootabega »

black6 wrote: post #85

I use the cheapest toothbrush I can buy with homemade toothpaste and haven't had a cavity since middle school. The only dental problem I've had in my adult life was my tooth with the filling getting cracked in a car wreck. Technology marketing continues to suck wealth away from consumers.

I'm not that extreme, but I somewhat agree. I just want them to make square handle toothbrushes common again. It's impossible to get a good grip and torque on the newer rounded ones when your hands are wet and toothpasty or waxy from floss.

Re: Dyson CameraJet electric toothbrush

#127

Post by helsinkiandrew »

prodigycorp wrote: post #114
SamBam wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't great evidence to suggest that electric toothbrushes are much better at removing plaque than manual. E.g. this metaanalysis [1] found basically no difference. There are also studies that show that electric is better, like this meta-analysis that found a small effect [2] and this Cochrane review. [3] What I generally read in articles is that the single biggest thing that makes a difference is brushing for…

Perhaps there's a selection effect where people who buy electric toothbrushes are pre-disposed to care more about dental health.

No, I would think all trials are random with people assigned brushes

> 5068 participants were randomised to receive either a powered toothbrush or a manual toothbrush. Majority of the studies included adults, and over 50% of the studies used a type of powered toothbrush

https://www.cochrane.org/evidence/CD002281_poweredelectric-t...

Re: Dyson CameraJet electric toothbrush

#128

Post by noja »

yread wrote: post #124

On topic of dental innovation why isn't there a toothbrush with accelerator that would monitor which areas you've cleaned and where do you need to work more? Or even better: a device (like dentures) that you put in your mouth, bite on it and it brushes all your teeth at once

I’m pretty sure oral b has that.

Re: Dyson CameraJet electric toothbrush

#129

Post by JohnFen »

SamBam wrote: post #93
imglorp wrote: post #74

> Dyson CameraJet™ is clinically proven to be more effective in improving gum health by removing and preventing plaque buildup.² Vs a manual tooth brush. Notice they don't include ultrasonic and rotating brushes in that statement.

There isn't great evidence to suggest that electric toothbrushes are much better at removing plaque than manual. E.g. this metaanalysis [1] found basically no difference. There are also studies that show that electric is better, like this meta-analysis that found a small effect [2] and this Cochrane review. [3] What I generally read in articles is that the single biggest thing that makes a difference is brushing for…

Every time I get my teeth cleaned by someone new, they comment that I must be using an electric toothbrush because my teeth are in such good shape.

But I don't. I use the least expensive manual toothbrushes I can find. They're always surprised to hear that.

I suspect that how good a particular type of toothbrush is depends more on the person's brushing habits than anything about the toothbrush tech.

Post reply on HN