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

'Tooth repair drug' may replace fillings

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 223 posts

Re: 'Tooth repair drug' may replace fillings

#201

Post by wahern »

proaralyst wrote: post #169
credit_guy wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few days ago I bought Sensodine with NovaMin. The NovaMin technology doesn't exactly restore the enamel, but does something similar. Here's how wikipedia describes it: "Bioactive glass: Newer Sensodyne products contain calcium sodium phosphosilicate (brand name NovaMin). NovaMin sticks to an exposed dentin surface and reacts with it to form a mineralized layer. The layer formed bonds with the tooth, and is therefor…

"Sensodyne has removed the NovaMin ingredient from their US products" Any idea why? The cited articles don't appear to mention that.

I gathered from Amazon and other user reviews that the NovaMin patent holder, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), figured that it would make more money in the U.S. selling it as a prescription product rather than OTC.

IIRC, there may also have been some complexities regarding the FDA, and perhaps some cross-licensing issues, that figured into GSK's decision. The information is out there, it just requires sifting through the Google hits and piecing together the true story.

I buy European Sensodyne on Amazon for a family member with sensitive teeth, and only dug deep enough to satisfy myself that at least some EU sellers weren't scammers.

Re: 'Tooth repair drug' may replace fillings

#202

Post by brandon272 »

elros wrote: post #136
brandon272 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dental implants are really cool, but they are also incredibly expensive.

Well in most civilized places, including where I live, ordinary people don't have to deal with dental costs on a one-off basis. You just pay your taxes (or the state pays them if you can't afford it) and you're provided with healthcare. Seems pretty reasonable if you ask me.

In Canada our universal healthcare doesn't cover dental issues, and even private insurance that most people would have through work only cover what is essentially considered "necessary". I think an impant is probably considered a luxury and certainly wouldn't be covered through insurance.

Re: 'Tooth repair drug' may replace fillings

#203

Post by dv_dt »

brandon272 wrote: post #10
slimsag wrote: post #3

This is insanely cool, and I imagine there is no need for me to explain how useful this would be in comparison to the current dental approaches today. But is this technology ever going to be available to consumers? I remember reading about similar advancements almost three years ago and haven't heard anything related until now. Maybe I'm pessimistic, but I think we won't see this in practice for a Very Long Time™.

I actually find these articles depressing because it seems like nothing like this ever ultimately comes to fruition. I'm guessing these "breakthroughs" have always been just around the corner. I recall having a conversation with my dentist almost 20 years ago about things that were up and coming that were about to make our lives a lot easier in terms of saving and strengthening and building tooth enamel but none of w…

I think it's only really depressing if an advancement is stuck idly behind something non-technical like lack of capital, or legal wrangling, or being acquired and shelved. Other than that, if there were real technical bumps that sidelined the advancement, well that's just part of the process.

What one really wonders at, is technology where there were technical failures, but were really a small distance away from success for lack of combination the right bit of information to push it over the edge - but are now locked away in storage in some proprietary corner somewhere.

Re: 'Tooth repair drug' may replace fillings

#204

Post by astrodust »

avip wrote: post #126
neverminder wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. What if there's a bug and when your "copy" is created at destination original is not destroyed? Would you agree to be killed, should your copy agree instead? Even worse, what if there's an anomaly in transporting data, original is destroyed and copy emerges disfigured, dead or something in between? Teleportation scares the shit out of me.

As in the quite ancient https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdxucpPq6Lc

Original NFB source: https://www.nfb.ca/film/to_be/

Re: 'Tooth repair drug' may replace fillings

#205

Post by metachor »

wslh wrote: post #38

This is the complete paper: http://www.nature.com/articles/srep39654 I wonder why they almost never linked to the source.

Because it's easier to garner clicks for ad impressions by making bold claims about the amazing (unproven) future benefits of a minor scientific discovery than by presenting readers with the actual science.

Re: 'Tooth repair drug' may replace fillings

#206

Post by majewsky »

awqrre wrote: post #156
majewsky wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just yesterday I saw a documentary on the dangers of atomic radiation, and one of the numbers I remember is that the dose of radiation from a dental x-ray is less than the average daily dose of background radiation. So, entirely negligible unless you're getting a dental x-ray every week or more often.

You are probably talking about the low radiation bite-wing digital x-rays... But some type of dental X-rays have orders of magnitude more radiations, like the Panoramic X-rays (those are very common in dental offices) or the much worst Cone-beam computed tomography (3D). I agree that there probably isn't much risk but they give them out like candies.

I checked Wikipedia for the different types, and apparently I had a panoramic X-ray made last year.

A quick googling finds [1] which puts the maximum dose for X-rays at 0.17 mSv. Wikipedia [2] puts the average background radiation around the world at 3 mSv per year, or 0.082 mSv per day. So while 170 mSv is indeed "orders of magnitude more radiation" than an X-ray of a single tooth, it's still roughly in the order of magnitude I estimated (around a day's worth of background radiation).

[1] http://www.ada.org/en/member-center/oral-health-topics/x-ray... (section "Radiation Exposure in Dentistry")

Re: 'Tooth repair drug' may replace fillings

#207

Post by hackits »

test1235 wrote: post #123
hackits wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Used toothpaste with fluoride. Though the fridge was constantly stoked with sugar, fruit juice, bread and bread toppings. Kid of ironic that my Mum is a dietitian who is mobility obese.

>mobility obese morbidly?

Stupid auto correct, yes.

Re: 'Tooth repair drug' may replace fillings

#208

Post by cookiecaper »

throwaway00061 wrote: post #122
cookiecaper wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, there is undoubtedly a genetic side to it. My teeth decay rapidly -- as an under-two toddler, I had to undergo full anesthesia for a dental rehabilitation. Though neither my siblings nor my parents have very bad teeth, I've always been the exception (I guess I got just the right mutation). My pediatric dentist was always expressing astonishment at how quickly my teeth decay. You know how dentists say "Hey, I ca…

You might want to pay Dr. Kim Kutsch a visit, or at least watch some of his webinars on YT. One of the things he recommends that could help you is ordinary bleach (sodium hypochlorite) heavily diluted to about 0.05% as an anti-microbial rinse.

I know the other guy is giving you a hard time about the throwaway, but I do appreciate this. I'll watch some of his stuff, it looks interesting. Thanks for sharing.

Re: 'Tooth repair drug' may replace fillings

#209

Post by gumby »

Dentists are very conservative. About 10 years ago we did some compassionate use studies of dissolvable drug metering systems that would cause bone regeneration -- so that an implant would attach to the jaw just the same as your original teeth did (actually new bone would grow around it). The X-rays were amazing and folks who'd been in pain for decades due to wobbly tooth implants, bridges etc were thrilled.

Company decided not to go ahead with clinical trials after doing market research on dentists in the US. Went ahead with a different drug for a different indication instead.

Re: 'Tooth repair drug' may replace fillings

#210

Post by [deleted] »

advertising wrote: post #26
brandon272 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually find these articles depressing because it seems like nothing like this ever ultimately comes to fruition. I'm guessing these "breakthroughs" have always been just around the corner. I recall having a conversation with my dentist almost 20 years ago about things that were up and coming that were about to make our lives a lot easier in terms of saving and strengthening and building tooth enamel but none of w…

I remember reading an article about these scientists experimenting with blue light and the larger capacity to store data. ~15 years later blu-ray came out. All hope is not lost.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN