Fake Science ramphant in commercials

George,Y · 2008-05-22 07:06:21

Commercials always want to appear scientific, but actually many aren't.

Recently dent health industry start boasting a new toothbrush that can, not only brush teeth, but also brush tongue. Many brands claim that there are millions of bacteria in tongue that may cause odor and uncleaness of your mouth. But the truth is-your tongue is the Cleanest place in your mouth, where there is fewest bad bacteria. Just because a 3D video showing bacteria dots in the tongue doesn't mean you have to buy their overpriced and useless toothbrush to press it and make you sick every morning.

Proof? Number 1. The tongue is the source of saliva, and saliva can kill most of bacteria known to be harmful to humans. A emergency rescue book will tell you to spit some saliva to your wound when no medicine available. So, how can a place full of bacterica detergent the source of all bacteria?

Proof No. 2. The odor is actually caused in somewhere else, in the upper back mouth. 1/4 of humans have a special gel in this area to help filter the inhale after the nose. And this place, certainly, is the inner door to trap miscellaneous outside bacteria. More unfortunately, it has the least chance to receive saliva in the mouth. Many outside bacteria can multiply in this warm, wet and rich in food piece area and cause ordor.

You can do an easy experiment to verify my claim. Insert your finger into your mouth, palm facing up. And try to scrach a little bit of that gel in the roof. Yes there it is! And pull it out and smell. I guarantee you will smell the most disgusting thing in your life! I was almost dizzy when I smell mine.

The solution can come in various ways. You think it. You can brush that area but it could make you sick. Or you can raise your head when listering your mouth to take special care of that place, which is my habit.

BTW. If you haven't found that gel, it means you are among the fortunate people who normally don't need to worry about their mouth ordor.

Forget about the commercials, google truth.:D

Ricky · 2008-05-22 08:25:00

Proof? Number 1. The tongue is the source of saliva, and saliva can kill most of bacteria known to be harmful to humans. A emergency rescue book will tell you to spit some saliva to your wound when no medicine available. So, how can a place full of bacterica detergent the source of all bacteria?

While true, that actually just leads to more resistant bacteria in your mouth. Specifically the kind of bacteria you don't want in your cuts. I would imagine the amount of bacteria on your tounge vs. gums to be at the very least comparable, if not pretty much equal.

But why can't you just brush your tongue with a normal brush? Or use mouthwash?

mathsyperson · 2008-05-22 10:08:52

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJSlRyQfho4

George,Y · 2008-05-22 16:13:29

Ricky, you just ignored the most important Proof 2.

And moreover, here comes Proof 3. The surface of the tongue is covered by mass taste sensor cells. Violently brushing it could result in loss in taste.

Proof 4. When not needed, always trying to kill bacteria isn't necessarily a good thing. Scientists have found the uproaring allergy cases in industrial contries may be the result for too strict cleaness. Simply put, when the immune system has no foes to attacks, it attacks friends.

Ricky · 2008-05-22 16:37:26

I didn't ignore it George... I just didn't have any objections to it. Somehow you have gotten the opinion that I think your wrong. I don't see any harm in brushing ones tongue, but I rarely if ever do it myself.

Violently brushing it could result in loss in taste.

Brushing anything violently is bad. Heck, doing just about anything violently is bad. That isn't an argument against brushing, it's an argument against doing things violently.

Proof 4. When not needed, always trying to kill bacteria isn't necessarily a good thing. Scientists have found the uproaring allergy cases in industrial contries may be the result for too strict cleaness. Simply put, when the immune system has no foes to attacks, it attacks friends.

Utter BS! "when the immune system has no foes to attacks, it attacks friends." is a total fabrication. Only dysfunctional immune systems do such things.

Ricky · 2008-05-22 16:48:32

After thinking about 2 some more, it is at the very least an over statement. To say that bad breath is caused by any one sole thing is an over statement.

1/4 of humans have a special gel in this area to help filter the inhale after the nose.

You mean the soft pallet? Can you provide a link to this "special gel"?

Perhaps it contributes, that I don't know. But I do know that there are other factors which contribute to bad breath as well as overall dental health. A man with decaying teeth will have worse breath than one with clean, and this has nothing to do with "special gel"s. Also, bad smell does not imply that there is something wrong with a certain area, or it has a lot of bacteria.

George,Y · 2008-05-23 02:10:54

"Brushing anything violently is bad"
-so far all the "tongue brushes" are much harder than the tongue, let alone for the bare sensor cells. So brushing tongue is a violent action.

""when the immune system has no foes to attacks, it attacks friends." is a total fabrication. Only dysfunctional immune systems do such things."
-yes, but when an immune system has nothing to do, it can easily turn to a dysfunctional one.

"You mean the soft pallet? Can you provide a link to this "special gel"?"
It was Scientific America, 1-2 years ago.

Ricky · 2008-05-23 05:37:39

"Brushing anything violently is bad"
-so far all the "tongue brushes" are much harder than the tongue, let alone for the bare sensor cells. So brushing tongue is a violent action.

The tongue has evolved to take such beatings. I'd like to see some evidence suggesting that brushing your tongue increases the risk of "loss of taste".

-yes, but when an immune system has nothing to do, it can easily turn to a dysfunctional one.

Evidence?

"You mean the soft pallet? Can you provide a link to this "special gel"?"
It was Scientific America, 1-2 years ago.

A simple "no" would suffice.

simron · 2008-06-24 11:34:41

However, I do agree with his claim that fake science is rampant in commercials. I always think of those commercials saying that "hair is 50% shinier using this shampoo...". How do they measure shininess (not sure if that's a real word )?

mikau · 2008-06-28 13:56:08

While we're on the subject of science and oral health, has anyone else heard the claim that Fluoride, an ingredient commonly used in toothpaste that is supposed to strengthen your teeth, actually does no such thing? Many conspiracy theorists seem to endorse this notion, and I've often wondered if there's any truth to it.

MathsIsFun · 2008-06-28 15:23:59

Only sketchy evidence I believe ... and possible adverse effects, too!

John E. Franklin · 2008-07-03 11:44:06

(on the subject of losing your taste... , I lost my taste in
1998 for a week after chewing on a stubborn piece of
rhubarb for about an hour. Chocolate tasted like nothing
or cardboard, and soda wasn't fun to drink.)

Ricky · 2008-07-03 18:27:02

Sketchy evidence?

MathsIsFun · 2008-07-03 19:02:06

Thanks... "annually averted 0.29 (95%CI: 0.16-0.42) carious coronal and 0.22 (95%CI: 0.08-0.37) carious root surfaces".

Does "0.29" mean 29% fewer?

mikau · 2008-07-04 07:38:56

Hey, thanks, Ricky. It feels better that we've not been using some totally bogus product all this time.

Ricky · 2008-07-04 19:08:06

I'll have to read the full article to say for certain, but I'd imagine that's the difference between a control and experimental group. Unfortunately, I'm in between universities right now, and hence don't have access.

George,Y · 2008-07-20 00:06:17

"The tongue has evolved to take such beatings. I'd like to see some evidence suggesting that brushing your tongue increases the risk of "loss of taste"."

evidence of any food that has the same beating as the tongue brush?

Evidence?

A discovery programme I watched sometime ago

Ricky wrote:

""You mean the soft pallet? Can you provide a link to this "special gel"?"
It was Scientific America, 1-2 years ago.
A simple "no" would suffice.
"

What if I find this article in the library??? Would you applogize, Ricky??

Ricky · 2008-07-20 06:42:33

A discovery programme I watched sometime ago

A Spike TV program I watched a while ago said that discovery program was wrong.

What if I find this article in the library??? Would you applogize, Ricky??

No, because I asked you for the information so I could look it up. You didn't provide any. If you now fulfill my request, you still didn't provide any when I made that comment. Thus, that comment was deserved.

George,Y · 2008-07-23 07:52:37

Then I am sorry the original source isn't with me right now.

However I did provide a self examination - probe your upper jaw for its smell and do the experiment yourself. Have you done that before your denial on my statements?

Ricky · 2008-07-23 09:21:56

Have you done that before your denial on my statements?

First off, I'm not denying any of your statements. At least, not the statement that a "special gel" contributes to bad breath. That could very well be true. You haven't provided any reason for it to be so. Instead, you try to overstate your case by providing various claims that have really almost nothing to do with it, most of which are either over exaggerations or utterly false. And I agree that a toothbrush for your tongue is a rather silly idea.

Claims:

1. Saliva kills most of the harmful bacteria in your mouth.

The tongue is the source of saliva, and saliva can kill most of bacteria known to be harmful to humans.

Counter evidence

2. It's a good idea to spit in your cuts if you're short of proper medical supplies.

A emergency rescue book will tell you to spit some saliva to your wound when no medicine available.

Counter evidence:

It has not been shown that human licking of wounds disinfects them, but licking is likely to help clean the wound by removing larger contaminants such as dirt and may help to directly remove infective bodies by brushing them away. Therefore, licking would be a way of washing, useful if purer water isn't available to the animal or person.

Note that while it may be beneficial to lick ones wounds, this is has not been shown to be true because of saliva.

3. Odor is caused by the "special gel"

The odor is actually caused in somewhere else, in the upper back mouth.

Anyone who says this has not smelled decaying teeth. It may be a source as well, but it is not the only source.

4. Violently brushing could cause a loss of taste.

The surface of the tongue is covered by mass taste sensor cells. Violently brushing it could result in loss in taste.

Until positive evidence is given, this claim can be dismissed. However, I have tried to search for cases where someone has lost their sense of taste because of brushing, and came up empty. The most conclusion thing I've found is Wrong Diagnosis which does list Poor Oral Hygiene, but it does not say this includes brushing of the tongue.

5. Immune systems in bodies without bacterial become autoimmune.

Simply put, when the immune system has no foes to attacks, it attacks friends.

Again, until positive evidence is put forth, this claim can be dismissed. If it were true, then doctors would be idiots for setting up sterile quarantines.

So in review:

1 is demonstrably false
2 is not exactly false, but there is to date insufficient evidence to support it
3 is an over statement at best
4 has absolutely no positive evidence. I will count not being able to find cases, as well as not being listed as a cause on Wrong Diagnosis as negative evidence.
5. Has absolutely no positive evidence, and it is hard to imagine a study that could actually produce such evidence.

However I did provide a self examination - probe your upper jaw for its smell and do the experiment yourself. Have you done that before your denial on my statements?

I have no idea what this "special gel" is! You don't seem to either, at least the actual name of it. The only thing I can figure is that it's your soft pallet. The only other thing it could be is your nasal cavity itself, and if that's the case, it can't contribute to bad breath (or at least not much) because air doesn't pass by it when it comes out of your mouth.

If it's your soft pallet, mine smells no differently from the rest of my mouth. If it's your nasal cavity, then I refuse to touch it. That hurts!

Laterally Speaking · 2008-07-25 12:01:21

A very thorough examination, Ricky.

In any case, the majority of bad breath comes from the food you have consumed since the last time you brushed your teeth, as this food will be all over the surface of your teeth, gums, tongue, and pallet, decaying fairly rapidly under the effect of the resident bacteria. The only exception to this would be if your teeth themselves are decaying, in which case they contribute quite a bit, whether you've eaten anything recently or not.

Zach · 2008-09-25 00:32:52

My research says that your immune system doesn't give you an autoimmune disease because it's bored.

George,Y · 2008-10-28 16:18:14

3. Odor is caused by the "special gel"

The odor is actually caused in somewhere else, in the upper back mouth.

Anyone who says this has not smelled decaying teeth. It may be a source as well, but it is not the only source.

____________________________________
This might not be exhaustive, but clearly the upper palley smells much worse than the tongue for most people. And this is enough. Regarding the teeth problem, brushing the tongue wouldn't help either.

You may be a good critic on my words, but you lost the main point.

"5. Immune systems in bodies without bacterial become autoimmune.

Simply put, when the immune system has no foes to attacks, it attacks friends.

Again, until positive evidence is put forth, this claim can be dismissed. If it were true, then doctors would be idiots for setting up sterile quarantines.

"
___________________________
Well, these was seen in a discovery documentory. Some one researched the common traits of alergic patients, and found most of them were raised in very clean environment. I did see this documentory, but again, I cannot give exact source. Neither does my library has medical archives.

I just suggest guys you put dig upto your upper jaw with your finger and smell the gel for yourself, and use a finger of another hand to scratch a little bit of your tongue. Compare and guess improve which can help you acheive a better breath.

True, some one doesn't have that gel, and true some one need to see the dentist before fixing the breath a minor problem, but for those of you do have the gel and with healthy teeth, you examine it for yourself. And you control your own wallet, not some salesperson or some science paper.

Ricky · 2008-10-29 07:32:47

This might not be exhaustive, but clearly the upper palley smells much worse than the tongue for most people. And this is enough. Regarding the teeth problem, brushing the tongue wouldn't help either.
You may be a good critic on my words, but you lost the main point.

Even when I assume you meant "in most cases" or "for the average person", you're still making a statement and not providing any evidence. "Try it for yourself" just doesn't hold up. One case does not prove the rule. And just because it smells does not mean the smell is carried in your breath. Indeed if there is minimal interaction between your breath and the soft pallet (which I have no idea how much of a smell gets carried, nor how you could measure it), then it wouldn't affect a thing.

George, do people who take care of their teeth had as bad smelling breath as people who don't? Obviously not. And if the smell is caused by your soft pallet, why is this the case?

Well, these was seen in a discovery documentory. Some one researched the common traits of alergic patients, and found most of them were raised in very clean environment. I did see this documentory, but again, I cannot give exact source. Neither does my library has medical archives.

"I saw it, therefore it's true," just doesn't cut it. Sorry, but whether you saw something or not does not provide any evidence for your case. It still has no merit in the end, and hence, can be dismissed until positive evidence is put fourth.

George,Y · 2008-10-29 12:28:19

Even when I assume you meant "in most cases" or "for the average person", you're still making a statement and not providing any evidence.

Again, I do not have the funding to hire subjects to come up with how much percent.

"Try it for yourself" just doesn't hold up. One case does not prove the rule.
But again, one case can prove the one case. Well a gross rule not.

Indeed if there is minimal interaction between your breath and the soft pallet (which I have no idea how much of a smell gets carried, nor how you could measure it), then it wouldn't affect a thing.

Here is where you start your assumption, Ricky. How do you conclude the "minimal interaction" between breath and soft pallet? I think it is as much as, if no more than, the interaction with the upper tongue. It's just arguing the ceiling hasn't been blown by wind while the floor has. And again, upper pallet is at the door to nose system, bearing more breath in normal nose breathing.

""I saw it, therefore it's true," just doesn't cut it"
Good point, Ricky! But again, "I haven't seen it, therefore it's not true" is ignorant as well.

Math Is Fun Forum

#1 2008-05-22 07:06:21

Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#2 2008-05-22 08:25:00

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#3 2008-05-22 10:08:52

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#4 2008-05-22 16:13:29

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#5 2008-05-22 16:37:26

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#6 2008-05-22 16:48:32

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#7 2008-05-23 02:10:54

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#8 2008-05-23 05:37:39

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#9 2008-06-24 11:34:41

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#10 2008-06-28 13:56:08

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#11 2008-06-28 15:23:59

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#12 2008-07-03 11:44:06

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#13 2008-07-03 18:27:02

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#14 2008-07-03 19:02:06

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#15 2008-07-04 07:38:56

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#16 2008-07-04 19:08:06

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#17 2008-07-20 00:06:17

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#18 2008-07-20 06:42:33

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#19 2008-07-23 07:52:37

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#20 2008-07-23 09:21:56

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#21 2008-07-25 12:01:21

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#22 2008-09-25 00:32:52

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#23 2008-10-28 16:18:14

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#24 2008-10-29 07:32:47

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

#25 2008-10-29 12:28:19

Re: Fake Science ramphant in commercials

Board footer