Hey @dang (I know it doesn't work, but isn't it fun to use your imagination?), can we get this press release replaced by a link to the actual paper [0]? This one is even open-access!
Why? The press release is much more useful for the vast majority of HN readers in my opinion. The paper is something you read if you want to know more so the right place for it is the comments.
In general, not referring to this specific case, scientific papers are often written for people with specialized background and are hard to understand for people without that background, even if they're otherwise smart and educated.
Just to say, I actually disagree entirely. I do not believe press releases are, almost ever, valuable. Papers are just a format (with some writing style conventions that tend to follow the given field-of-study); they may be intimidating for many, but the hacker spirit and ethos is to dive in and tackle it, and that will pay far more dividends for everyone reading it than to consume more advertising. :)
You can buy the supplies and make nano silver flouride now, relatively cheaply compared to dental work. If you have a non corporate dentist, you could even ask them to apply it. The basic mechanism has been used on teeth forever, and adding the nano particles prevents the chemical from permanently staining your teeth black or blue (which is why it hasnt ever been more popular to begin with.)
I found other sites indicating it's entering trials soon to be on the market next year. That's still a bit speculative obviously, but it sounds more promising that just being a working theory.
If it a commercial product marketed as "homeopathic" or various nonsense loopholes that the government has been bullied into leaving open, then sure.
But an actual medical product for sale to consumers that makes claims like "restores dental enamel" would have to present scientific evidence to the FDA that this claim is accurate.
> When applied, the gel creates a thin and robust layer that impregnates teeth, filling holes and cracks in them.
Having an option other than crowning to treat cracks would be a game-changer, especially since the AAE not long ago put out a policy paper recommending that all teeth with cracks (even asymptomatic) receive crown coverage, which is both costly and presents a risk of inducing irreversible pulpitis and subsequent necrosis in the tooth (due to the heat and mechanical trauma of the crown prep.).
I feel like I've been reading this exact same article for the last 15 years.. I find it very difficulty to parse what is real and what is vaporware in the medical breakthroughs community.
Just 7% of studies that do a preliminary study on humans actually get through phase 3 and get approved for use. This is before even the preliminary point, its a tooth (or even a tooth analogue) in a petri dish. No idea if the material will be safe in a human mouth yet.
There is a lot of hyping of results in medicine papers in general but its not really their fault. The entire academic world is being forced to publish or die as governments look to measure results from the science they instead get what is measured and everyone has to embellish the importance of what they found and always find positive results.
Despite how obtuse the current administration views are, this has been true for decades. The churn of new papers and hype around medicine/biotech is nothing new.
Says nothing about endemic reproducibility crisis of the social sciences.
Since student loans have been basically guaranteed (bankruptcies can’t erase student loan obligations, in an attempt to push rates lower) and tuition steeply rose, academic institutions’ ratio of administrators to students has skyrocketed to a bureaucratic mess, leading to a flywheel of higher education costs and incentivizing research for money’s sake over impact to the field.
Real impact would be reproducing notoriously iffy studies, but that doesn’t bring in the dollars.
KPIism is the death knell of modern society. In the 90s and 2000s this mantra of "measure and improve" took hold like a virus. It is in all instances I observe a rats race where everybody just starts to look for the cheat-codes instead of "doing-the-right-thing".
Arguably America is the pinnacle of this right now, where (many) politicians and (many) business leaders now feel justified do whatever's legal just to score points. I would argue this type of thinking was birthed in the UK though under Thatcher who as a first step removed the general trust in (civil servants in her case) your fellow human beings. Blair then came up to replace that trust with KPIs.
We need to get back to a world where we trust people to do the right thing - without measuring their success in short-term KPIs.
> The entire academic world is being forced to publish or die as governments look to measure results from the science they instead get what is measured and everyone has to embellish the importance of what they found and always find positive results.
It sounds like they're running it like a business.
Publish or perish is more about status & careerism within academia than any sort of govt forcing function. If you don't publish, you are invisible to your peers and your career stagnates, regardless of the govt funding environment.
It is entirely their fault. If no one agrees to do performative research, the problem will be solved.
The problem is some people prefer an academic lifestyle in exchange for doing performative research.
Yes there are other actors eg politicians demanding performative productivity, but mostly it’s the inmates running the asylum.
Academia is one failed western institution amongst many, and those failures are ultimately directed by the actions of the individuals that comprise those institutions.
Same feeling here. Dental seems particularly fraught (though maybe I just pay more attention to it out of interest). I know the cycle time between press releases/hype and actual application can be the better part of a decade, so I assume that's coloring my perception too.
re: dental in particular - It seems like enamel regeneration and stem-cell-based tooth replacement have both been in the news year-after-year without applications actually coming to market.
Does anyone know why casein phosphopeptide (Recaldent) hasn't had more success?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9294493/
You can buy the Japanese gum with Recaldent online, but I expected it to be in the gum display in retail shops by now.
Everyone knows that teeth are luxury bones in the US. The market just isn't there for fancy treatments. The ultra-wealthy just get their teeth replaced with perfect veneers anyway.
Really? This sounds more like someone's plan to get grants to research stem cells than someone's plan to repair (or replace) teeth.
We already have a natural ability to grow new teeth that replace existing ones. Everybody does it... once. Where's the research into getting it to happen again?
A similar approach was reported in 2019,[1] but that produced thinner coatings, and the recovery of the architecture of inner layers of enamel was only partial.
While I 100% agree with what you wrote, I'd just add that it does seem in my own dental visits over my lifetime that there have been real advancements, too. But yes, I agree, hard for non-expert to parse.
Seeing SLA 3D printers at my dentist's office was pretty cool. Apparently they use them for a variety of fixturing and jigs, and have a workflow that includes a handheld scanning unit that SLAMs to generate a solid model of the patient's teeth.
I'm surprised how many low-hanging fruit issues are still not solved. So many dentists use cold or tap water for their rinse sprayer despite the fact that many people have temperature sensitivity issues with their teeth. Having lukewarm water would be trivial but I've yet to go to an American dentist that does it.
ART with HVGIC has basically solved dental caries since the 80s. But you aren't likely to get it in the US or most western nations because there is a massive industry around drilling and filling with resins and then solving the multitude of problems that such a destructive process creates. Crowns, root canal, periodontal disease etc.
A better approach is to monitor FDA updates. When an FDA trial shows positive results for a new treatment and approval for public use appears imminent, that would qualify as news in that regard.
As it turns out, this is really hard to do. There are a lot required of teeth: they have to be extremely durable to resist repeated strain of chewing ,stay in the gums, not be rejected by body, etc. It's little surprise progress has been so slow.
It is probably tough getting investment because this is ultimately cosmetic and not something covered by most dental insurance. Existing repair is probably good enough and I’d expect cheaper too.
Cancers have had extremely effective new treatments developed for in the last ten years.
Depending on the type of cancer, we now have cures or treatments that stave off death for years.
My wife has a rare type of cancer with not much research thrown at it, and even her type of cancer went from a median time of survival measured in months to several years.
Tooth regrowth is something I was really hoping for. I abused one of my molars. After years of efforts (repeated fillings, a crown) to stave off losing the tooth it finally had to come out last month. Now I'm waiting for the bone graft to "take" before getting an implant. I was hoping I'd waited long enough for tooth regrowth to become "a thing" but I have not.
(Should have taken better care of it when I was younger and not ignored the massive hole that was growing in it. Chalk it up to a bad dental experience as a child and 25+ years of avoiding dentists as a result...)
I am confused by this comment about HIV/AIDS. Is it cynical? Are you confused why we have not "cured" HIV? I grew up during the AIDS Crisis. It was awful. People were dropping like flies. Today, you can be "technically" HIV positive, but test negative, give birth to HIV-negative children, and have unprotected sex (and not infect your partner). As far as I am concerned, the battle has been won. It is a miracle in my eyes.
I would say, maybe look at medical studies from the opposite end, epidemiological studies look at factors that reduce mortality/morbidity. Granted, it's less flashy, basically vaccines, alcohol/tobacco reduction, increase in active lifestyle, statins/ace inhibitors, monoclonals/oncology fanciness. although someone who actually is an MPH can probably correct me.
on the neuroscience side, off the top of my head, the most impactful things have been better anticoagulants and preventive care for stroke, monoclonal abs for autoimmune diseases like MS/myasthenia, , certain stereotactic brain surgeries, and such. But considering what ails most people, the overall population effect probably is minuscule compared to say better crash safety in automobiles.
Fortunately there doesn't seem to be any harm from flossing. At least from my anecdotal experience there are positive bad breath ramifications. (I've also been conditioned, by flossing regularly, to feel like my mouth is "cleaner" after flossing, to the point that it feels bad if I don't.)
Many people are not honest about how much they floss, and those who do often don't floss correctly. We have a well understood mechanism for how tooth decay and gingivitis happen, and it's clear clinically that flossing can address these more effectively than brushing alone can. Furthermore, the subjective reduction in bad breath means harmful oral bacteria are reduced, which could have benefits beyond oral health.
This is the key issue. There is zero doubt whatsoever that flossing is essential, and the fact that the empirical evidence is equivocal shows the limitations of science to prove even the most obvious things.
Any chance you would be willing to summarize the research or provide information on some relevant studies? I've always been skeptical about flossing and would like to learn more.
I hear so many counter-logical ideas proposed with "scientific evidence". Poorly designed studies and P-Hacking has ruined the publics trust in science. I highly doubt flossing is a net negative for almost anyone.
I have replaced my sensodyne with mirasensitive hap+. It is more expensive, even more so than sensodyne. However it has helped incredibly with my exposed roots which used to be very sensitive. Now they are less sensitive than they used to be with sensodyne. I can swish cold water and eat sour foods again.
My current routine is roughly brush_teeth(toothpaste={mirasensitive, random_cheap_toothpaste}[day%2]) as you don't need to apply HAP every single day.
I find that I still have to be careful eating apples and lemons straight up. To protect myself I thoroughly swish and rinse water a few times shortly after consuming these fruits. If I don't do that, my teeth get extremely sensitive and it takes a few days for the hap to repair it again.
Thank you for the mention of Boka. This sent me down a rabbit hole of research, both the positives compared to other toothpaste, like not containing SLS, parabens, or titanium dioxide, but also the findings of trace amounts of lead, arsenic, and mercury in it. The trace amounts are much lower than the standards considered okay by the FDA and the European regulators, but not EWG, which doesn't accept pretty much any trace amounts.
Don't see any difference. I'm on a low carb diet and never eat things with added sugar anyways, so I assume that I could even drop toothpaste alltogether.
Also, my teeth have been yellow since as long as I can remember (and long before I got into coffee and tea) and the same is true for everyone in my family - and Boka didn't change that at all.
So... it is not doing me any harm, so far, but it is also not performing any miracles.
Not saying Boka is good, but to clarify, non-additive sugars from fruits and teas can significantly affect tooth enamel in addition to citric acids. Coffee is also a big culprit as well. You definitely should not drop toothpaste altogether.
I've used `BioMin F` with fluorapatite which is apparently more effective than hydroxyapatite - it's not a miracle regrowth protein like this article seems to claim, but its definitely a noticeable difference compared to regular toothpastes.
Xylitol reduces cavity‑causing bacteria and raises salivary flow, which can increase calcium and phosphate availability. That environment supports natural remineralisation and boosts the effect of fluoride or hydroxyapatite products, but xylitol itself doesn’t deposit minerals into enamel.
For actual mineral replacement, look to fluoride toothpaste/varnish, casein phosphopeptide‑amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP‑ACP), or nano‑hydroxyapatite formulations; xylitol gum is a useful adjunct.
Coincidentally, there recently was a very similar story from another UK university, where they used a substance found in hair to make a new "tooth repair" toothpaste:
If anyone's a dentist or is close to one, I'd love to know something I haven't found a satisfactory answer for online: if the vast majority of cavities were "magically" cured over the next few years, what impact would that have on the finances of your practice?
I'm not suggesting there's a conscious conspiracy or anything malicious. But I observe that incentives are weirdly aligned. I wonder what this kind of thing would do to a very large industry if all of a sudden some percentage of business disappeared. Is it a large percentage? Would they pivot to more preventative medicine? Would patients adopt a longer duration between checkups?
I’m a dentist. If cavities vanished tomorrow, it would definitely change things, but not as much as you might guess. Cavities and crowns make up a decent slice of what most general practices do, but there’s still gum disease, cracked teeth, teeth wear, implants, bite issues, cosmetic work, and so on. A lot of what keeps people coming in isn’t just sugar, although from the outside I understand why it might look like sugar is the whole game.
Financially, there’d be a short-term hit for offices that rely heavily on fillings, but the field would adjust. Most of us would focus more on prevention, maintenance, and elective care. Dentistry has already been slowly shifting that direction for years with better materials, scanners, and aligners.
So if everyone suddenly stopped getting cavities, I’d still have plenty to do. It would just look a little different.
But if you don't have cavities, doesn't that mean that there's going to be now reduced need for not just fillings, but down the road also crowns, root canals, implants, etc (at least caused by tooth deterioration that starts as cavities)?
I think there would just be fewer dentists. It's like asking what would happen to the finances of weight loss clinics if magically Americans weren't as obese.
Teeth are still susceptible to mechanical wear, and as life expectancy is inching towards 90 (at least among wealthier people in wealthier countries), dentists will have a lot of work to do anyway.
The societal standard matters more than raw incidence of cavities etc. Three generations ago, it was considered absolutely normal to have dentures in your fifties. Nowadays, middle class people tend to die with (heavily fixed, but still their) teeth and some implants in their mouths.
Not a dentist, but my read of the situation is that dentists generally are not very excited about doing fillings and there's a push towards getting into more complex procedures like root canals, invisalign and implants. It's probably partly due to wanting to upskill and increase your repertoire and partly due to the margins. The margins with these procedures can be an order of magnitude more than that of fillings, especially anything that is supplied by a big brand.
I like how you ask explicitly for replies from dentists and then most of the answers you get are people saying they aren't dentists but still want to give their two cents anyway.
Not a dentist but I definitely couldn't see it going away. Also curious to hear a more knowledgeable opinion.
There will always be accidents and need of non-cavity repairs. As a kid I broke a healthy tooth eating Doritos. It didn't make sense to my dentist either. I've broken a less healthy (but repaired) tooth on a candy coated peanut, and one a Twizzler Nib.
I grind my teeth, so everything is being worn and torn at a higher rate. The mouth guard won't generate itself.
Hate to say it, but if I thought my teeth would stick around longer, I'd probably be more likely to seek cosmetic fixes. I'm apparently really hard on them or something.
It occludes dentinal tubules, helping reduce dentin hypersensitivity. It's a tooth-desensitizing agent helping people who are for example, very sensitive to very cold/hot temperature in their mouth.
There is evidence that it can foster enamel/dentin mineral gain, but head to head studies shows that it's comparable to regular fluoride toothpaste and not superior. E.g. In a randomized in-situ trial (Caries Research, 2017), adding 5% NovaMin to a 927-ppm SMFP toothpaste did not improve remineralization outcomes vs the same fluoride formula without NovaMin.
Also, you can find NovaMin in the US (e.g., NUPRO Sensodyne Prophylaxis Paste with NovaMin).
I don't know if this is everyone's experience, but you get a distinct feeling of smoothness after using it, unlike any other toothpaste. Since NovaMin reacts with saliva to remineralize the tooth you'd imagine it's a stronger bond than directly filling up crevices with nanohydroxyapatite, and studies seem to [slightly] confirm that.
anecdotal experience: my wife had somewhat botched dental filling proceedure. it probably damaged her teeth in some way and it became very sensitive for any fluids or foods. they tried to redo it, but it only increased sensitivity further.
i gave her apagard renamel (with nanohydroxyapatite ). after a few days sensitivity went down and after a few weeks it completely disappeared
I used to use sensodyne for cold-sensitive teeth, but they changed ingredients to include something I’m now allergic to. Or I recently developed an allergy to whatever their unchanged ingredients are.
I'm not sure what the takeaway is here? If I read that correctly, they only found one study and just reported their results? Is that because there are literally no studies on this worldwide? I find that very hard to believe.
I know there's value to recording the selection process and all that but it's a little funny to have a review that ends up only including one study: at that point just give me a link, not a paper.
My teeth are so much better since I stopped drinking alcohol. I have no clue why that is, but drinking alcoholic beverages with sugar (e.g. cocktails) was especially bad. Since I stopped drinking alcohol I don't have any issues with my teeth anymore.
As someone with low maintenance teeth how far has dental tech procedures improved in last 30 years? Feels dental hygienist are all using tools that haven't changed in decades.
My dental practice has only one significant improvement that I’ve noticed in the last 30 years, which is to use a sonic scaler to remove plaque instead of manual scraping with an implement. Somebody in the field would certainly be able to provide a better and more informative answer.
For the uninitiated, Theodent is a $100/tube toothpaste made with the chocolate extract theobromine, instead of fluoride, based on a similar paper quite a while back.
one of my front tooth was chipped years ago while playing around and some days ago i was feeling sensitive in that tooth i take very good care of my teeth, when i visited dentist he said this tooth will die sooner or later because of trauma it endured the nerves will slowly die and we eventually have to do root canal. i was very disappointed to know that there is nothing i can do to keep that tooth alive
well most of research i did online and the numerous videos i watched about when root canal is necessary tell this as cases that when tooth endured trauma it will slowly die it may take upto 10 years in this case nothing can be done to save tooth
there maybe some experimental approach that i dont know of that may save or heal tooth do you know any?
This is horrible advice. Do everything you can to keep your original teeth, even partially with a crown is better than a post or dentures. Nothing will perform as good, and the side effects of dentures range from pain to liquid diet if/when your gums can't support them.
An artificial crown may be better, but not the roots. Natural teeth are fixed in the jaw in a very ingenious way that is durable and somewhat flexible at the same time. Not so with implants; the metal fuses with the bone in a hard way and transmits all the shocks fully into the jaw.
My dad did that a couple of decades ago (we nicknamed him Bionic Mouth), and now his body is rejecting almost all of it, and he has to get even more advanced and expensive stuff to replace it (on a fixed retirement income to boot).
Wouldn't you rather reapply a coating that allows the base to regrow, than have to constant get them ground out and replaced as they accumulated small damage? Growth sounds way better than static existence.
TL;DR: EDTA is the magic ingredient that will annihilate the disease-causing biofilm on your teeth & gums, especially when you fund your own studies and spend the rest of your money made from your overpriced toothpaste gel on marketing.
Just brush and floss 2x a day, and chew gum if you like to.
Poorly designed studies, materials proposed without insight into ramifications and manufacturing, and P-Hacking has ruined the publics trust in science. I blatantly just ignore any headline like this now. Can't trust science anymore.... sad. How many new "cancer cures" have been posted to Reddit and HN over the last decade that never came to fruition.
Not to say doing the science and studying to find new approaches is not beneficial. I just think we need to reconsider how we communicate new research. Its like how CEOs hype up AI products at this point. "This will change everything ..... potentially maybe in twenty years (omitted)"
Hey @dang (I know it doesn't work, but isn't it fun to use your imagination?), can we get this press release replaced by a link to the actual paper [0]? This one is even open-access!
All the best,
-HG
[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-64982-y
Why? The press release is much more useful for the vast majority of HN readers in my opinion. The paper is something you read if you want to know more so the right place for it is the comments.
In general, not referring to this specific case, scientific papers are often written for people with specialized background and are hard to understand for people without that background, even if they're otherwise smart and educated.
Just to say, I actually disagree entirely. I do not believe press releases are, almost ever, valuable. Papers are just a format (with some writing style conventions that tend to follow the given field-of-study); they may be intimidating for many, but the hacker spirit and ethos is to dive in and tackle it, and that will pay far more dividends for everyone reading it than to consume more advertising. :)
All the best,
-HG
1 reply →
Is this a commercial product that has been approved by a regulator to make these claims? Amazing. Newsworthy.
Is this a press release from a university research group, as it appears to be (the site is down)? Then it's nearly meaningless.
You can buy the supplies and make nano silver flouride now, relatively cheaply compared to dental work. If you have a non corporate dentist, you could even ask them to apply it. The basic mechanism has been used on teeth forever, and adding the nano particles prevents the chemical from permanently staining your teeth black or blue (which is why it hasnt ever been more popular to begin with.)
https://fourthievesvinegar.org/tooth-seal/
Any reports from actual users of this?
3 replies →
A website with thieves in the url, brilliant.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2502731-cavities-could-...
I found other sites indicating it's entering trials soon to be on the market next year. That's still a bit speculative obviously, but it sounds more promising that just being a working theory.
Huh? If this was an article from a commercial entity selling a product we'd be calling it a marketing puff piece and asking for the science.
If it a commercial product marketed as "homeopathic" or various nonsense loopholes that the government has been bullied into leaving open, then sure.
But an actual medical product for sale to consumers that makes claims like "restores dental enamel" would have to present scientific evidence to the FDA that this claim is accurate.
1 reply →
> When applied, the gel creates a thin and robust layer that impregnates teeth, filling holes and cracks in them.
Having an option other than crowning to treat cracks would be a game-changer, especially since the AAE not long ago put out a policy paper recommending that all teeth with cracks (even asymptomatic) receive crown coverage, which is both costly and presents a risk of inducing irreversible pulpitis and subsequent necrosis in the tooth (due to the heat and mechanical trauma of the crown prep.).
There is the potential of ability of people to regrow teeth
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/a66012157/hu... regrowth-trials-japan/
This would highly disrupt the dental-industrial-complex
Australian dentists would ban the toothpaste in Australia if it actually works.
I feel like I've been reading this exact same article for the last 15 years.. I find it very difficulty to parse what is real and what is vaporware in the medical breakthroughs community.
Just 7% of studies that do a preliminary study on humans actually get through phase 3 and get approved for use. This is before even the preliminary point, its a tooth (or even a tooth analogue) in a petri dish. No idea if the material will be safe in a human mouth yet.
There is a lot of hyping of results in medicine papers in general but its not really their fault. The entire academic world is being forced to publish or die as governments look to measure results from the science they instead get what is measured and everyone has to embellish the importance of what they found and always find positive results.
Despite how obtuse the current administration views are, this has been true for decades. The churn of new papers and hype around medicine/biotech is nothing new.
Says nothing about endemic reproducibility crisis of the social sciences.
Since student loans have been basically guaranteed (bankruptcies can’t erase student loan obligations, in an attempt to push rates lower) and tuition steeply rose, academic institutions’ ratio of administrators to students has skyrocketed to a bureaucratic mess, leading to a flywheel of higher education costs and incentivizing research for money’s sake over impact to the field.
Real impact would be reproducing notoriously iffy studies, but that doesn’t bring in the dollars.
KPIism is the death knell of modern society. In the 90s and 2000s this mantra of "measure and improve" took hold like a virus. It is in all instances I observe a rats race where everybody just starts to look for the cheat-codes instead of "doing-the-right-thing".
Arguably America is the pinnacle of this right now, where (many) politicians and (many) business leaders now feel justified do whatever's legal just to score points. I would argue this type of thinking was birthed in the UK though under Thatcher who as a first step removed the general trust in (civil servants in her case) your fellow human beings. Blair then came up to replace that trust with KPIs.
We need to get back to a world where we trust people to do the right thing - without measuring their success in short-term KPIs.
1 reply →
> The entire academic world is being forced to publish or die as governments look to measure results from the science they instead get what is measured and everyone has to embellish the importance of what they found and always find positive results.
It sounds like they're running it like a business.
25 replies →
Is there a way I can search for the studies that recently got approved? Somehow setup an alert for it?
2 replies →
Publish or perish is more about status & careerism within academia than any sort of govt forcing function. If you don't publish, you are invisible to your peers and your career stagnates, regardless of the govt funding environment.
It is entirely their fault. If no one agrees to do performative research, the problem will be solved.
The problem is some people prefer an academic lifestyle in exchange for doing performative research.
Yes there are other actors eg politicians demanding performative productivity, but mostly it’s the inmates running the asylum.
Academia is one failed western institution amongst many, and those failures are ultimately directed by the actions of the individuals that comprise those institutions.
11 replies →
Enamelon Toothpaste from the 1990s:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/127083185095
"proven to strengthen tooth enamel" I remember researching the stock and deciding not to buy.
Patents from the 1990s https://patents.justia.com/assignee/enamelon-inc
It seems the company is still around https://www.enamelon.com
What about "Sensodyne Pronamel"? There is usually someone in the comments raving about its effects.
3 replies →
I've actually been occasionally using Enamelon because it was recommended by my dentist for sensitivity and I think it actually works.
I'm going to try Boka as recommended above though, it seems like a more updated and modern solution.
Did you tried :D ?
Same feeling here. Dental seems particularly fraught (though maybe I just pay more attention to it out of interest). I know the cycle time between press releases/hype and actual application can be the better part of a decade, so I assume that's coloring my perception too.
re: dental in particular - It seems like enamel regeneration and stem-cell-based tooth replacement have both been in the news year-after-year without applications actually coming to market.
Does anyone know why casein phosphopeptide (Recaldent) hasn't had more success? https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9294493/ You can buy the Japanese gum with Recaldent online, but I expected it to be in the gum display in retail shops by now.
Everyone knows that teeth are luxury bones in the US. The market just isn't there for fancy treatments. The ultra-wealthy just get their teeth replaced with perfect veneers anyway.
1 reply →
> stem-cell-based tooth replacement
Really? This sounds more like someone's plan to get grants to research stem cells than someone's plan to repair (or replace) teeth.
We already have a natural ability to grow new teeth that replace existing ones. Everybody does it... once. Where's the research into getting it to happen again?
10 replies →
A similar approach was reported in 2019,[1] but that produced thinner coatings, and the recovery of the architecture of inner layers of enamel was only partial.
[1]https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw9569
While I 100% agree with what you wrote, I'd just add that it does seem in my own dental visits over my lifetime that there have been real advancements, too. But yes, I agree, hard for non-expert to parse.
Seeing SLA 3D printers at my dentist's office was pretty cool. Apparently they use them for a variety of fixturing and jigs, and have a workflow that includes a handheld scanning unit that SLAMs to generate a solid model of the patient's teeth.
1 reply →
Can you share some specifics?
I'm surprised how many low-hanging fruit issues are still not solved. So many dentists use cold or tap water for their rinse sprayer despite the fact that many people have temperature sensitivity issues with their teeth. Having lukewarm water would be trivial but I've yet to go to an American dentist that does it.
This might be the dental equivalent of the "Groundbreaking New Battery Tech" type of article.
ART with HVGIC has basically solved dental caries since the 80s. But you aren't likely to get it in the US or most western nations because there is a massive industry around drilling and filling with resins and then solving the multitude of problems that such a destructive process creates. Crowns, root canal, periodontal disease etc.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03005...
Isn't ART also destructive? Just that it's done with hand instruments instead of a drill
Also the aspect of shooting in neuro toxins close to the brain when doing these procedures
exact same reaction. I remember hearing about "regrowing teeth through sound waves"... in 2006. https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/dentist-engineer-team-up-to-... Can't say I have heard it offered anywhere yet....
A better approach is to monitor FDA updates. When an FDA trial shows positive results for a new treatment and approval for public use appears imminent, that would qualify as news in that regard.
yup here is one from 2007
https://www.technologyreview.com/2007/02/22/272845/regrowing...
As it turns out, this is really hard to do. There are a lot required of teeth: they have to be extremely durable to resist repeated strain of chewing ,stay in the gums, not be rejected by body, etc. It's little surprise progress has been so slow.
or, solid state batteries, graphene, fusion, quantum computers, agi =)
I was expecting to see something along this storyline[0] which seems believable though not palatable.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44922571
It is probably tough getting investment because this is ultimately cosmetic and not something covered by most dental insurance. Existing repair is probably good enough and I’d expect cheaper too.
> I feel like I've been reading this exact same article for the last 15 years.
I was about to comment the same thing, I feel like I've been seeing this talked about since the 90s
- HIV/AIDs
- Cancer
- Tooth regrowth
It feels like it won’t ever be done for some reason
Cancers have had extremely effective new treatments developed for in the last ten years.
Depending on the type of cancer, we now have cures or treatments that stave off death for years.
My wife has a rare type of cancer with not much research thrown at it, and even her type of cancer went from a median time of survival measured in months to several years.
Tooth regrowth is something I was really hoping for. I abused one of my molars. After years of efforts (repeated fillings, a crown) to stave off losing the tooth it finally had to come out last month. Now I'm waiting for the bone graft to "take" before getting an implant. I was hoping I'd waited long enough for tooth regrowth to become "a thing" but I have not.
(Should have taken better care of it when I was younger and not ignored the massive hole that was growing in it. Chalk it up to a bad dental experience as a child and 25+ years of avoiding dentists as a result...)
6 replies →
While a cure remains elusive, HIV treatment is now extremely effective. Antiretroviral shots can keep people symptom free indefinitely.
Cancer treatment varies by type of cancer but many have dramatically improved outcomes.
I am confused by this comment about HIV/AIDS. Is it cynical? Are you confused why we have not "cured" HIV? I grew up during the AIDS Crisis. It was awful. People were dropping like flies. Today, you can be "technically" HIV positive, but test negative, give birth to HIV-negative children, and have unprotected sex (and not infect your partner). As far as I am concerned, the battle has been won. It is a miracle in my eyes.
1 reply →
i thought the first two have had huge improvements in the last decade?
4 replies →
+ Male birth control
+ Alzheimer’s cure
+ Hair regrowth
6 replies →
Compared to the 1980s, HIV is a chronic manageable disease that does not even reduce your quality of life.
Plenty of cancers have become manageable with the advent of immunological treatments.
Tooth regrowth seems to be the most complicated of those three, which isn't even surprising, given that it is basically organ regeneration.
HIV/Aids have made huge progress and so did cancer. Also "cancer" isn't a single disease, they're quite different.
- hair regrowth
3 replies →
>> I feel like I've been reading this exact same article for the last 15 years..
You must be new
I think 30-40 years at this point. Same thing with regrowing teeth.
I would say, maybe look at medical studies from the opposite end, epidemiological studies look at factors that reduce mortality/morbidity. Granted, it's less flashy, basically vaccines, alcohol/tobacco reduction, increase in active lifestyle, statins/ace inhibitors, monoclonals/oncology fanciness. although someone who actually is an MPH can probably correct me.
on the neuroscience side, off the top of my head, the most impactful things have been better anticoagulants and preventive care for stroke, monoclonal abs for autoimmune diseases like MS/myasthenia, , certain stereotactic brain surgeries, and such. But considering what ails most people, the overall population effect probably is minuscule compared to say better crash safety in automobiles.
Wait until you read that the scientific evidence for flossing doesn't really confirm the promised benefits.
Fortunately there doesn't seem to be any harm from flossing. At least from my anecdotal experience there are positive bad breath ramifications. (I've also been conditioned, by flossing regularly, to feel like my mouth is "cleaner" after flossing, to the point that it feels bad if I don't.)
1 reply →
Many people are not honest about how much they floss, and those who do often don't floss correctly. We have a well understood mechanism for how tooth decay and gingivitis happen, and it's clear clinically that flossing can address these more effectively than brushing alone can. Furthermore, the subjective reduction in bad breath means harmful oral bacteria are reduced, which could have benefits beyond oral health.
This is the key issue. There is zero doubt whatsoever that flossing is essential, and the fact that the empirical evidence is equivocal shows the limitations of science to prove even the most obvious things.
4 replies →
Any chance you would be willing to summarize the research or provide information on some relevant studies? I've always been skeptical about flossing and would like to learn more.
3 replies →
I hear so many counter-logical ideas proposed with "scientific evidence". Poorly designed studies and P-Hacking has ruined the publics trust in science. I highly doubt flossing is a net negative for almost anyone.
tbf, it does require a technique otherwise you risk just pushing plaque underneath your gums
Where? Source please?
Wait what? Please share
[dead]
There was a period where my dentist would always ask do you floss in a check-up. They haven't asked for years at this point.
What about Hydroxyapatite?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxyapatite
Anyone on this stuff? I want to take a break from fluoride paste.
I have replaced my sensodyne with mirasensitive hap+. It is more expensive, even more so than sensodyne. However it has helped incredibly with my exposed roots which used to be very sensitive. Now they are less sensitive than they used to be with sensodyne. I can swish cold water and eat sour foods again.
My current routine is roughly brush_teeth(toothpaste={mirasensitive, random_cheap_toothpaste}[day%2]) as you don't need to apply HAP every single day.
I find that I still have to be careful eating apples and lemons straight up. To protect myself I thoroughly swish and rinse water a few times shortly after consuming these fruits. If I don't do that, my teeth get extremely sensitive and it takes a few days for the hap to repair it again.
I've been enjoying using this over the past 3 weeks.
This is nano-hydroxyapatite, meant to be more effective than hydroxyapatite alone.
https://www.boka.com/
(P.S I'm not affiliated with boka)
Thank you for the mention of Boka. This sent me down a rabbit hole of research, both the positives compared to other toothpaste, like not containing SLS, parabens, or titanium dioxide, but also the findings of trace amounts of lead, arsenic, and mercury in it. The trace amounts are much lower than the standards considered okay by the FDA and the European regulators, but not EWG, which doesn't accept pretty much any trace amounts.
I decided to try it after all.
2 replies →
Been using Boka for years.
Don't see any difference. I'm on a low carb diet and never eat things with added sugar anyways, so I assume that I could even drop toothpaste alltogether.
Also, my teeth have been yellow since as long as I can remember (and long before I got into coffee and tea) and the same is true for everyone in my family - and Boka didn't change that at all.
So... it is not doing me any harm, so far, but it is also not performing any miracles.
Not saying Boka is good, but to clarify, non-additive sugars from fruits and teas can significantly affect tooth enamel in addition to citric acids. Coffee is also a big culprit as well. You definitely should not drop toothpaste altogether.
I've been using NoBS toothpaste tabs for a couple years which are nano-hydroxyapatite. I find them effective. No issues at my dentist.
In fact, a year ago, they wanted to put in a filling for a minor cavity, but I wanted to put it off and by the time I went back they said it was gone.
edit: I also like the tabs because they're easy to travel with.
Been using Boks for a couple months, haven't noticed much difference. Maybe some reduced sensitivity.
I've used `BioMin F` with fluorapatite which is apparently more effective than hydroxyapatite - it's not a miracle regrowth protein like this article seems to claim, but its definitely a noticeable difference compared to regular toothpastes.
Any specific reason? Are you concerned about Purity of Essence?
Any thoughts on how this might be different from existing products like GC Tooth Mousse (CPP-ACP-based, recommended by our children's dentist)?
A paper from 2011 on the topic:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9374843/
EDIT: https://archive.is/MYBSe
Site is down, not in archive.org or archive.today. This Yandex Cache link worked for me: https://yandexwebcache.net/yandbtm?fmode=inject&tm=176237557...
Doesn't xylitol gum do the same thing? Re-mineralize teeth?
Xylitol reduces cavity‑causing bacteria and raises salivary flow, which can increase calcium and phosphate availability. That environment supports natural remineralisation and boosts the effect of fluoride or hydroxyapatite products, but xylitol itself doesn’t deposit minerals into enamel.
For actual mineral replacement, look to fluoride toothpaste/varnish, casein phosphopeptide‑amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP‑ACP), or nano‑hydroxyapatite formulations; xylitol gum is a useful adjunct.
[dead]
Coincidentally, there recently was a very similar story from another UK university, where they used a substance found in hair to make a new "tooth repair" toothpaste:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44922571
If anyone's a dentist or is close to one, I'd love to know something I haven't found a satisfactory answer for online: if the vast majority of cavities were "magically" cured over the next few years, what impact would that have on the finances of your practice?
I'm not suggesting there's a conscious conspiracy or anything malicious. But I observe that incentives are weirdly aligned. I wonder what this kind of thing would do to a very large industry if all of a sudden some percentage of business disappeared. Is it a large percentage? Would they pivot to more preventative medicine? Would patients adopt a longer duration between checkups?
I’m a dentist. If cavities vanished tomorrow, it would definitely change things, but not as much as you might guess. Cavities and crowns make up a decent slice of what most general practices do, but there’s still gum disease, cracked teeth, teeth wear, implants, bite issues, cosmetic work, and so on. A lot of what keeps people coming in isn’t just sugar, although from the outside I understand why it might look like sugar is the whole game.
Financially, there’d be a short-term hit for offices that rely heavily on fillings, but the field would adjust. Most of us would focus more on prevention, maintenance, and elective care. Dentistry has already been slowly shifting that direction for years with better materials, scanners, and aligners.
So if everyone suddenly stopped getting cavities, I’d still have plenty to do. It would just look a little different.
But if you don't have cavities, doesn't that mean that there's going to be now reduced need for not just fillings, but down the road also crowns, root canals, implants, etc (at least caused by tooth deterioration that starts as cavities)?
I think there would just be fewer dentists. It's like asking what would happen to the finances of weight loss clinics if magically Americans weren't as obese.
I will say my dentists always try to convince me to floss more often, regardless of any economic benefit they might have for me to disregard my teeth.
I also would imagine cleanings aren't where the big money is in the profession, but like you would be interested to hear from actual dentists.
Teeth are still susceptible to mechanical wear, and as life expectancy is inching towards 90 (at least among wealthier people in wealthier countries), dentists will have a lot of work to do anyway.
The societal standard matters more than raw incidence of cavities etc. Three generations ago, it was considered absolutely normal to have dentures in your fifties. Nowadays, middle class people tend to die with (heavily fixed, but still their) teeth and some implants in their mouths.
Not a dentist, but my read of the situation is that dentists generally are not very excited about doing fillings and there's a push towards getting into more complex procedures like root canals, invisalign and implants. It's probably partly due to wanting to upskill and increase your repertoire and partly due to the margins. The margins with these procedures can be an order of magnitude more than that of fillings, especially anything that is supplied by a big brand.
I like how you ask explicitly for replies from dentists and then most of the answers you get are people saying they aren't dentists but still want to give their two cents anyway.
Not a dentist but I definitely couldn't see it going away. Also curious to hear a more knowledgeable opinion.
There will always be accidents and need of non-cavity repairs. As a kid I broke a healthy tooth eating Doritos. It didn't make sense to my dentist either. I've broken a less healthy (but repaired) tooth on a candy coated peanut, and one a Twizzler Nib.
I grind my teeth, so everything is being worn and torn at a higher rate. The mouth guard won't generate itself.
Hate to say it, but if I thought my teeth would stick around longer, I'd probably be more likely to seek cosmetic fixes. I'm apparently really hard on them or something.
Well until this stuff comes out I'll keep using smuggled FDA-unapproved Novamin toothpaste. Atonement for my neglect
How does NovaMin / calcium sodium phosphosilicate compare to toothpaste with nanohydroxyapatite in it?
It occludes dentinal tubules, helping reduce dentin hypersensitivity. It's a tooth-desensitizing agent helping people who are for example, very sensitive to very cold/hot temperature in their mouth.
There is evidence that it can foster enamel/dentin mineral gain, but head to head studies shows that it's comparable to regular fluoride toothpaste and not superior. E.g. In a randomized in-situ trial (Caries Research, 2017), adding 5% NovaMin to a 927-ppm SMFP toothpaste did not improve remineralization outcomes vs the same fluoride formula without NovaMin.
Also, you can find NovaMin in the US (e.g., NUPRO Sensodyne Prophylaxis Paste with NovaMin).
I don't know if this is everyone's experience, but you get a distinct feeling of smoothness after using it, unlike any other toothpaste. Since NovaMin reacts with saliva to remineralize the tooth you'd imagine it's a stronger bond than directly filling up crevices with nanohydroxyapatite, and studies seem to [slightly] confirm that.
anecdotal experience: my wife had somewhat botched dental filling proceedure. it probably damaged her teeth in some way and it became very sensitive for any fluids or foods. they tried to redo it, but it only increased sensitivity further.
i gave her apagard renamel (with nanohydroxyapatite ). after a few days sensitivity went down and after a few weeks it completely disappeared
1 reply →
Same here. My dentist was impressed after a year of me using it.
Sensodyne?
I just learned about this 5 mins ago and did some basic research. Here's what I found:
- Sensodyne Repair and Protect contains 'NovaMin' (possibly only in some markets; check the ingredients!)
- NovaMin is the brand name for calcium sodium phosphosilicate
- It reacts with saliva to form a physical layer of hydroxyapatite on your teeth
- This layer blocks the tubules that trigger pain from temperature and such
- It also supports remineralization (how exactly?)
22 replies →
I used to use sensodyne for cold-sensitive teeth, but they changed ingredients to include something I’m now allergic to. Or I recently developed an allergy to whatever their unchanged ingredients are.
I have yet to find a replacement for it.
1 reply →
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7068624
I'm not sure what the takeaway is here? If I read that correctly, they only found one study and just reported their results? Is that because there are literally no studies on this worldwide? I find that very hard to believe.
1 reply →
I know there's value to recording the selection process and all that but it's a little funny to have a review that ends up only including one study: at that point just give me a link, not a paper.
Admittedly it's possible I've been bamboozled
My teeth are so much better since I stopped drinking alcohol. I have no clue why that is, but drinking alcoholic beverages with sugar (e.g. cocktails) was especially bad. Since I stopped drinking alcohol I don't have any issues with my teeth anymore.
As someone with low maintenance teeth how far has dental tech procedures improved in last 30 years? Feels dental hygienist are all using tools that haven't changed in decades.
My dental practice has only one significant improvement that I’ve noticed in the last 30 years, which is to use a sonic scaler to remove plaque instead of manual scraping with an implement. Somebody in the field would certainly be able to provide a better and more informative answer.
To a normal human, not at all
I ask my dentist about this cause it keeps appearing.
He’s a pretty modern dentist I think. He has no idea about it.
How many of these have we heard about over the years and yet … none ever come to market.
You know it's weird how we don't have a general "healing" gel yet..
Pretty sure I get re-targeted by ads for various versions of this for weeks on end after I do a single google search for a new toothpaste.
Usually the safety profiles of those companies are very very very bad, but probably reference very good research.
Is this going to be another Theodent?
For the uninitiated, Theodent is a $100/tube toothpaste made with the chocolate extract theobromine, instead of fluoride, based on a similar paper quite a while back.
one of my front tooth was chipped years ago while playing around and some days ago i was feeling sensitive in that tooth i take very good care of my teeth, when i visited dentist he said this tooth will die sooner or later because of trauma it endured the nerves will slowly die and we eventually have to do root canal. i was very disappointed to know that there is nothing i can do to keep that tooth alive
Get a second opinion
well most of research i did online and the numerous videos i watched about when root canal is necessary tell this as cases that when tooth endured trauma it will slowly die it may take upto 10 years in this case nothing can be done to save tooth
there maybe some experimental approach that i dont know of that may save or heal tooth do you know any?
2 replies →
Screw enamel; man-made materials are better.
If you ever get into any serious money, forget cars or houses: have your teeth ripped out and replaced with artificial ones.
This is horrible advice. Do everything you can to keep your original teeth, even partially with a crown is better than a post or dentures. Nothing will perform as good, and the side effects of dentures range from pain to liquid diet if/when your gums can't support them.
An artificial crown may be better, but not the roots. Natural teeth are fixed in the jaw in a very ingenious way that is durable and somewhat flexible at the same time. Not so with implants; the metal fuses with the bone in a hard way and transmits all the shocks fully into the jaw.
Using gold as the core would help but of course would be somewhat expensive.
1 reply →
I wonder whether there is any research into dental implant posts which incorporate flexibility: like some kind of bushing, or spring.
...
Doh, yeah: TSA! Titanium Shock Absorber:
https://bonecare.be/en/
So this entire subthread about implanted teeth rigidly connected to the bone is about mainstream technology, not the state of the art.
What are the disadvantages of having all the shocks go fully into the jaw?
3 replies →
My dad did that a couple of decades ago (we nicknamed him Bionic Mouth), and now his body is rejecting almost all of it, and he has to get even more advanced and expensive stuff to replace it (on a fixed retirement income to boot).
That sounds like that movie "the breast men"
These doctors pioneered silicone breast implants.
Eventually side effects happened, and they tried to prevent those patients from coming forward.
Later, it all came out... and all the patients just came back to them and paid for breast upgrades to the next generation saline implants.
Wouldn't you rather reapply a coating that allows the base to regrow, than have to constant get them ground out and replaced as they accumulated small damage? Growth sounds way better than static existence.
Cribbins' dentures would beg to differ.
[dead]
I just went down a rabbit hole researching a toothpaste that's giving me constant ads. I went looking for reviews and ended up posting a comment on /r/PeriodontalDisease - https://old.reddit.com/r/PeriodontalDisease/comments/1bcna04...
TL;DR: EDTA is the magic ingredient that will annihilate the disease-causing biofilm on your teeth & gums, especially when you fund your own studies and spend the rest of your money made from your overpriced toothpaste gel on marketing.
Just brush and floss 2x a day, and chew gum if you like to.
Sounds like...Novamin? That good stuff we used to have but is now not legal in the US but available to other countries.
Hmm.
Interesting. We have a Novamin-containg toothpaste in Australia, but you have to hunt it down.
Poorly designed studies, materials proposed without insight into ramifications and manufacturing, and P-Hacking has ruined the publics trust in science. I blatantly just ignore any headline like this now. Can't trust science anymore.... sad. How many new "cancer cures" have been posted to Reddit and HN over the last decade that never came to fruition.
Not to say doing the science and studying to find new approaches is not beneficial. I just think we need to reconsider how we communicate new research. Its like how CEOs hype up AI products at this point. "This will change everything ..... potentially maybe in twenty years (omitted)"
Is it Fuji 9?
Bob Mortimer will know
https://youtu.be/L1JR-9Z5ORE?si=6f4r6hu-_WoVBlsL
_Fine,_ I will rewatch 2 hours of Bob Mortimer clips of Would I Lie to You? instead of doing real work.
I’m so very glad someone got the reference. What joy I get from watching Mortimer in action.
[flagged]
[flagged]
If you're going to post AI slop, please read the room first.