Guest guest Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 At 11:02 PM 8/5/2003 -0500, you wrote: >You use a special toothbrush with tiny hollow bristles >that basically pipettes up debris that's in between your >teeth and gums. The idea is that if you take away the > " food " that allow the bad bacteria to grow, the good >bacteria gain the upper hand, and plaque, gum disease >and dental caries go away. I am so glad to read about this. My experience has been that good bacteria are preventing dental caries (and my dentist confirms that my teeth are in excellent shape - first time in several decades). I find that I tend to leave particles of grass-fed red meat in my mouth after eating without worrying too much about brushing, etc. I've been doing that about 4 years now. When I do brush it is just with water to mechanically remove the largest pieces - with no intent to sanitize. Also I think dark green vegetable juices seem to help the feeling in my mouth and I enjoy swishing them around the teeth languishing the sensation. I wonder, then, if certain foods might help the " good " bacteria along (I certainly know that sugary foods and carbohydrates seem to help the " bad " bacteria in my mouth). I tend toward eating in a paleo-style now. Thanks for any insight on foods in the mouth. Regards, -=mark=- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 >Thanks for any insight on foods in the mouth. Mark - Are you completely 'off' processed sugar? Processed sugar has the most extreme effect on the delopment of plaque in my mouth! -Allan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 I'm sorry but this doesn't make much sense to me. Also, I'm surprised that Price-Pottenger would promote this theory of dental hygeine, since it is basically the opposite of Price's findings, and Meinig, who is basically the PPNF dental guy, has expressed the opinion that dental decay is largely an internal problem, rather than one of feeding or not feeding bacteria in the mouth. I first question the idea that there are " good bacteria " and " bad bacteria " in the mouth which promote tooth decay or prevent tooth decay depending on their status as " good " or " bad. " Kefir, which is full of bacteria that are " good " for the gut, contains S. Fecalis, which is the number one cause of tooth decay in both Price's research and other research I've read of. So there is no clear distinction between " good " and " bad " mouth bacteria. If there is, than that means they sometimes have the opposite status in the mouth as they do the gut, which would mean that by eating a diet that " feeds good bacteria in the mouth " you're eating a diet that's bad for your gut! Not a likely proposition. Second, " good bacteria " secrete acids like all other bacteria-- take lactic acid for example, or acetic acid. I really don't see how these acids could be protective of tooth decay. An acid is an acid-- the acidic part of the acid is the H+ ion, the other part of the acid only determines how acidic the acid is-- i.e. how many H+ ions will disociate. Teeth are primarly made up of calcium carbonate-- CaCO3 -- (unless you take fluoride, they are made of Calcium Fluoride, Ca(F)2) and the H+ ions will have an affinity for the carbonate no matter what acid they came from. Which will ionize and free the calcium from the teeth. Third, I'm not sure how you can differentiate between foods that feed " good " and " bad " bacteria. Most foods feed both-- which is why someone who consumes FOS might feed good bacteria like Bifidus while another might feed Clostridium. Quite a few folks in Price's foundings consumed starches regularly without brushing their teeth, and starches certainly feed bad bacteria no matter how they are prepared, if the bad bacteria are there to eat them, and it is at least arguable that the more grains you consume-- however they're prepared-- beyond a certain reasonable amount, will lead to fungal overgrowths or some other gut problems. Yet the Swiss Price ate such foods and didn't clean their teeth whatsoever, which were so dirty they had a green " slime " coating them, yet they didn't get tooth decay. So the much more likely explanation of why both of you are able to let your dental hygeine slump while you are eating well is the same one that Price offered, and Melvin Page after him-- tooth decay is primarily an internal problem. What primarily determines whether the acids secreted by bacteria in your mouth will cause decay is not what kind of acid it is or what bacteria secreted it, but the condition of your teeth based on the vitamins, minerals, and cofactors in your diet. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 In a message dated 8/6/03 5:37:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, heidis@... writes: > Normally you make so much saliva that your mouth can > balance its PH pretty quickly. It is food held next to the teeth > that tends to form cavities, it seems. > Heidi, Good point. This may or may not be semantics, but food does not cause cavities. If anything the bacteria do, but it seems quite clear the exact opposite dynamic is at work-- poorly nourished teeth cause cavities. And while I don't think it would be perfectly correct to say so, I think it would be *more* accurate to say that cavities cause the bacteria than that bacteria cause the cavities. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 >Second, " good bacteria " secrete acids like all other bacteria-- take lactic >acid for example, or acetic acid. I really don't see how these acids could be >protective of tooth decay. I tend to agree, but there is a company researching a probiotic toothpaste. I posted the link some time ago but can't find it now. Anyway, their claim is that some bacteria prevent the plaque forming bacteria from attaching to the teeth. Not all bacteria form plaque -- but once the plaque forms, it holds the acids etc. next to the teeth. So the plaque bacteria is " bad " in the sense it forms plaque. Normally you make so much saliva that your mouth can balance its PH pretty quickly. It is food held next to the teeth that tends to form cavities, it seems. -- Heidi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 HP kills everything. Dip and rinse b4 using Amy Re: care of teeth and gums While we're on the subject -- Does anyone have suggestions for ensuring bacteria do not stay on your toothbrush? Daphne (feeling paranoid these days) > Heidi, > > Good point. This may or may not be semantics, but food does not cause > cavities. If anything the bacteria do, but it seems quite clear the exact opposite > dynamic is at work-- poorly nourished teeth cause cavities. And while I don't > think it would be perfectly correct to say so, I think it would be *more* > accurate to say that cavities cause the bacteria than that bacteria cause the > cavities. > > Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 >Heidi, > >Good point. This may or may not be semantics, but food does not cause >cavities. If anything the bacteria do, but it seems quite clear the exact opposite >dynamic is at work-- poorly nourished teeth cause cavities. And while I don't >think it would be perfectly correct to say so, I think it would be *more* >accurate to say that cavities cause the bacteria than that bacteria cause the >cavities. > >Chris You are quite right, it isn't the food itself (except perhaps lemon juice). And that is an interesting point ... my teeth are much better off than they were, and they are " smoother " -- the bacteria don't stick so easily. Semantically I guess the correct thing to say would be something about bacterial byproducts being held in close proximity to poor tooth enamel? -- Heidi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 >While we're on the subject -- Does anyone have suggestions for >ensuring bacteria do not stay on your toothbrush? > >Daphne (feeling paranoid these days) If you are REALLY paranoid they have these little gadgets with an ultraviolet light that sit there and sterilize your brush as it sits! If you use baking soda, it is a non-issue, the baking soda residue will kill most anything. As will salt. At least it will kill the things you want killed. -- Heidi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 In a message dated 8/7/03 1:57:41 AM Eastern Daylight Time, amyleewaters@... writes: > > HP kills everything. Dip and rinse b4 using > Amy, It kills *everything*? I thought it only killed anaerobic organisms. This is the logic I've read presented by folks who support rinsing with HP. How does it kill aerobic organisms? Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 In a message dated 8/7/03 7:44:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, s.fisher22@... writes: > ---->if i'm not mistaken you are sounding more and more like aajonus > vonderplatz daily! LOL I'm not familiar with his theory, but in general I do not buy the idea that bacteria do not cause disease. I think this has been proven incorrect. What is also incorrect is that an association with bacteria indicates a causal role for the bacteria. I believe that sometimes bacteria are causal and sometimes they are nto. In the case of tooth decay, gingivitis, and periodontitis, it seems ABSOLUTELY CLEAR, that NONE of these diseases are actually caused by bacteria or other organisms, but they are all caused by poor nutrition. In the etiology of plaque, what happens is a pellicle forms, which is a thin layer of proteins and other stuff over the teeth, then bacteria come in and feed off it. Eventually it gets mixed with food debris and all sorts of other stuff. But a) the bacteria are not necessarily in the mouth before the onset of the pellicle b)the food you eat is NOT the initial feeder of the bacteria that adhere to the pellicle and c) the composition of the pellicle, the areas it exists in, and the rate it is being formed at, affect the composition of mouth bacteria, rather than the other way around apparently, which indicates that bacterial associations with tooth decay are not indicative of a causal role for those bacteria, but rather that degrading your teeth and gums with poor nutrition will cause the certain types of bacteria to proliferate who like to eat degraded tooth and gum tissue. This is shown by the fact that CoQ10 supplementation is a fantastic remedy for periodontal disease. Is it an anti-microbial? No, but it is essential for gum health. You fix the problem from the inside out, and like magic the bacteria go away. This will not work for all periodontitis, but somewhere between 60-90% of periodontal patients have gum tissues deficient in CoQ10. For them it should work. But Price's experiments and many after him demonstrate without a smidgeon of a doubt that if dental disease progresses bacteria will have direct causal role in many degenerative diseases. The only way to stop this progression is to remove the infected tooth, its accompanying periodontal ligament, and some of the diseased bone under it. So for tooth decay, you can eliminate it by drinking raw milk, consuming bone stocks, taking codliver oil and eating raw grass-fed butter, and appanrelty you can do this while you are still eating foods that feed " bad " bacteria in the mouth, which indicates that the bacteria are relatively irrelevant and that nutrition is causal. Further, you can induce cavities by injecting sugar into the stomachs of rats, which indicates sugars role is purely nutritional and it's effect on mouth bacteria is relatively irrelevant. On the other hand, to fix a systemic infection induced by a root canal or dead tooth you have to remove the source of bacteria, which indicates the bacteria are causal. Furthermore, you can take the tooth (i.e. source of bacteria) and implant it under the skin of the animal and induce the same disease, while other non-infected agents do not cause the diease when implanted, and no dietary changes are necessary to induce the disease, which clearly indicates the bacteria are causal. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 >>>>>Good point. This may or may not be semantics, but food does not cause >cavities. If anything the bacteria do, but it seems quite clear the exact opposite >dynamic is at work-- poorly nourished teeth cause cavities. And while I don't >think it would be perfectly correct to say so, I think it would be *more* >accurate to say that cavities cause the bacteria than that bacteria cause the >cavities. ---->if i'm not mistaken you are sounding more and more like aajonus vonderplatz daily! LOL Suze Fisher Lapdog Design, Inc. Web Design & Development http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine http://www.westonaprice.org ---------------------------- " The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times. " -- Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher. The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics <http://www.thincs.org> ---------------------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.