Live data from Hacker News

Water Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

newsweek.com

31–40 of 105 posts

Re: Water Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

#31
post #7

As the article notes, this is all based on the Cochrane Collaborative methodology of searching for prior published scientific literature, and is not a conclusion based on a fresh study. The article also points out, "Another 2009 review[link] by the Cochrane group clearly shows that fluoride toothpaste prevents cavities, serving as a useful counterpoint to fluoridation’s uncertain benefits." [link] http://www.cochrane…

> The article also points out, "Another 2009 review[link] by the Cochrane group clearly shows that fluoride toothpaste prevents cavities, serving as a useful counterpoint to fluoridation’s uncertain benefits." I think you understood this, but I wanted to clarify for others: the Cochrane review that this article is about showed that fluoridated water may not prevent tooth decay. The 2009 review you mention does not co…

There's another relevant Cochrane review that compares the effect of multiple topical fluoride therapies vs. a single therapy (i.e. toothpaste.) http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD002781...

"The separate meta-analyses of fluoride gel or mouthrinse combined with toothpaste versus toothpaste alone favour the combined regimens, but differences were not statistically significant; the significant difference in favour of the combined use of fluoride varnish and toothpaste accrues from a very small trial and appears likely to be a spurious result. [Except for two studies finding gel + mouthrinse to be more effective than gel alone,] no other combinations of topical fluoride therapy were consistently superior to a single therapy."

Since fluoride can harm brains, kidneys, and more at certain doses, I'm glad people are interested in which therapies are most effective and are seeking the optimal exposure level.

Re: Water Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

#32
They don't fluoridate the water here in Portland, OR. Compared to other parts of the country where I've lived, the difference in people's teeth is pretty shocking. I haven't heard any alternative hypothesis that would explain this difference better than the lack of fluoridation here.

As I understand the article, they're saying that they couldn't find rigorous studies demonstrating the beneficial effects of fluoride. They don't claim there's any evidence against fluoride having beneficial effects, just that the studies haven't been done.

Re: Water Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

#33

From what I've read, we've already identified the specific bacteria responsible for tooth decay [1], but there seems to have no interest in developing treatments based on that insight. Instead we're supposed to essentially sterilize our mouths and remineralize our teeth (which is something saliva does naturally) with topical fluoride twice a day. My cat has never brushed her teeth, and they're fine, presumably becaus…

[deleted]

Re: Water Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

#34

From what I've read, we've already identified the specific bacteria responsible for tooth decay [1], but there seems to have no interest in developing treatments based on that insight. Instead we're supposed to essentially sterilize our mouths and remineralize our teeth (which is something saliva does naturally) with topical fluoride twice a day. My cat has never brushed her teeth, and they're fine, presumably becaus…

Oral probiotics do exist. Look them up on Amazon. I tried taking them for 6 weeks but I really have no idea how to measure their effectiveness. I'd be curious if anyone has any insight on this.

Re: Water Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

#35
post #27

From what I've read, we've already identified the specific bacteria responsible for tooth decay [1], but there seems to have no interest in developing treatments based on that insight. Instead we're supposed to essentially sterilize our mouths and remineralize our teeth (which is something saliva does naturally) with topical fluoride twice a day. My cat has never brushed her teeth, and they're fine, presumably becaus…

This made the news awhile ago, it's called STAMP (specifically targeted antimicrobial peptides). Here's a 2011 article that seems to show some progress. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21860239

Wow, sounds promising. Is that something you can buy?

Re: Water Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

#36

From what I've read, we've already identified the specific bacteria responsible for tooth decay [1], but there seems to have no interest in developing treatments based on that insight. Instead we're supposed to essentially sterilize our mouths and remineralize our teeth (which is something saliva does naturally) with topical fluoride twice a day. My cat has never brushed her teeth, and they're fine, presumably becaus…

Does this same bacteria also cause strep throat? What about gum disease?

Re: Water Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

#37
post #27

From what I've read, we've already identified the specific bacteria responsible for tooth decay [1], but there seems to have no interest in developing treatments based on that insight. Instead we're supposed to essentially sterilize our mouths and remineralize our teeth (which is something saliva does naturally) with topical fluoride twice a day. My cat has never brushed her teeth, and they're fine, presumably becaus…

This made the news awhile ago, it's called STAMP (specifically targeted antimicrobial peptides). Here's a 2011 article that seems to show some progress. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21860239

Evora will be glad to sell you probiotic lozenges containing benign mouth bacteria that can outcompete the harmful ones.

Personally, I used them for two months as directed, and saw no real difference.

Can't wait for a real product, I just hope it doesn't start off costing $200/month like some probiotics I've seen.

Re: Water Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

#38
Correlation.

Everyone should get the right amount of fluoride. This is actually quite difficult to measure and achieve.

WHO seem to have a good viewpoint:

"The effects of fluoride are best predicted by the dose (i.e. mg fluoride per kg of body weight per day), the duration of exposure and other factors such as age (e.g. dental fluorosis). However, most epidemiological studies concerning the effects of fluoride on teeth and bone have correlated the effects with the concentration of fluoride in the drinking-water (mg l–1 fluoride) consumed rather than total fluoride exposure. ... Perhaps the best general advice that can be given in relation to local conditions is that, at a minimum, the fluoride level in local water supplies should be monitored and the population examined for signs of excessive fluoride exposure (e.g. moderate and/or severe dental fluorosis and crippling skeletal fluorosis). Where treatment to remove fluoride is practised, chemicals used should be of a grade suitable for use in drinking-water supply as outlined in the WHO Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality."

http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/fluo...

Re: Water Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

#40
post #27

From what I've read, we've already identified the specific bacteria responsible for tooth decay [1], but there seems to have no interest in developing treatments based on that insight. Instead we're supposed to essentially sterilize our mouths and remineralize our teeth (which is something saliva does naturally) with topical fluoride twice a day. My cat has never brushed her teeth, and they're fine, presumably becaus…

This made the news awhile ago, it's called STAMP (specifically targeted antimicrobial peptides). Here's a 2011 article that seems to show some progress. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21860239

Wow, this is really interesting. Googling "C16G2" brought up some newer info. There's not much mainstream coverage, mostly just press releases and studies. But the company that's running with this is apparently called C3 Jian.

http://www.c3-jian.com/

They raised a $60M Series D in March of last year.

http://www.fiercebiotech.com/press-releases/c3-jian-closes-6...

They completed a Phase II clinical trial last Fall where they tested it as a mouthwash and a gel with three methods of application (tray, electric toothbrush, and manual toothbrush). Apparently gel in a tray won: 90% reduction in S. mutans population that lasted seven days after treatment ended.

http://globenewswire.com/news-release/2014/09/09/664615/1009...

C16G2 is the peptide that targets S. mutans. I suppose the idea is to develop more peptides targeting other species and give you a gel cocktail treatment (or maybe suppressing S. mutans is enough).

Being able to selectively kill exact species of bacteria ... that seems like a big deal.

Post reply on HN