“Anything that relates to water quality, removing contaminants, things like that, we’re not touching that,” Tuck [the bill sponsor] said. “It’s anything that has to do with health. So fluoride, vitamins, whatever else it is.

    • LaughingLion [any, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      no im serious not only is toothpaste uneccesary to good oral hygiene but numerous peer reviewed published studies show that not only does it not help you clean your teeth better but brushing without it often leads to better results

      another fun one: there is no good science behind flossing. the usa is one of the only countries that still pushes it. some countries that used to push it have stopped because the studies just dont show any significant benefit

        • LaughingLion [any, any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          23 hours ago

          This article talks about a review of studies about flossing but the link is no longer valid: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/03/health/flossing-teeth-cavities.html?_r=0

          As far as I know not a single official dental association in Europe recommends flossing. The UK used to. They stopped. But for flossing the information about it not actually be very effective (or not at all) is all over the internet. Between flossing and toothpaste the flossing stuff is the most dubious. It’s only useful if you have something stuck and need an extra bit of help dislodging it. Or if you just enjoy the feeling? Some people are strange like that.

          Here is a study on dry-brushing vs wet-brushing. They are just as effective as each other. (57% vs 58%) So adding some wetness (water) doesn’t do anything. I mention this one as a sort of control: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/idh.12358

          Here is a good one that looks at multiple studies from Journal of Clinical Periodontalogy. Main findings - “On average, 49.2% of plaque was removed when brushing was performed with a dentifrice, and 50.3% of plaque was removed when toothbrushing was performed without a dentifrice.” So, dentrifice or “toothpaste”, was actually slightly less effective (though not statistically significantly so) than brushing with it: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27513809/

          I can find some more studies if you like. The conventional wisdom and scientifically supported wisdom is that plaque is removed by the mechanical process of brushing. Toothpaste provides fluoride and can be especially beneficial in environments where fluoride is lacking from natural sources. To be clear, there are indigenous people around the world who do not use toothpaste but have a good fluoride content naturally in their water. Such communities who practice regular mechanical teeth cleaning tend to have good dental outcomes.

          If you live in the USA or another country that fluoridates your water you are most likely fine (I’m not a dentist so I can’t actually give you any advice). If you also supplement it with something like mouthwash, fluoride powder, toothpaste or anything else fluoridated you are definitely fine. You really do not need to obsess over it at all.

          What I will say is a big strike against toothpaste is much of it has all kind of nasty additives. Soaps. Microplastics. All kinds of shit.

          As far as control for bad breath brushing and mouthwash do all the work. You don’t need toothpaste at all. If you are concerned about bad breath carry around one of those tiny travel toothbrushes and brush after every meal. You can do it without toothpaste! Super easy to pop into a bathroom and just have a quick brush. That pretty much controls bad breath entirely. In over a decade of not using toothpaste I’ve never had issues with bad breath nor has my wife ever had an issue with my breath. Brush the old food out yo teefs and you good.

          • Lyudmila [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            So, digging through those articles, I immediately have some concerns.

            The first study, funded by toothpaste manufacturers, found no statistically significant difference between random people who may or may not use proper brushing technique being handed a dry brush with no dentifrice and being handed a wet brushing with no dentifrice. The second study was a meta-analysis of other trials that also has the same problems: brushing technique was not a controlled variable, and all tested dentifrices contained SLS.

            The big problem is that a lot of toothpastes contain surfactants like SLS or CAPB, which cause the toothpaste to foam and leave behind a smooth effect which is confusing to people. People specifically using a foaming dentifrice have a harder time discerning whether or not they’ve done an adequate job of removing plaque, hence the statistically insignificant but measurable difference in plaque removal between dry brushing without a dentifrice and wet brushing with one.

            This definitely needs some more study we’re never going to get because of capitalism.

            • LaughingLion [any, any]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 hours ago

              I would argue that the issue with brushing technique is not relevant to the effectiveness study. Normal people are going to vary in technique. Controlling too strictly for technique does not realistically tell us which is more or less effective in practice. Likewise, we can’t assume the toothpaste users where on average less effective or more effective than the toothpaste nonusers. Like I said, studies keep reinforcing this conclusion. At this point it’s more than reasonable to assume the conclusion that toothpaste doesn’t help with actual brushing is a pretty secure position.