Toothbrush…lightsaber…toothbrush…lightsaber…which removes more plaque?
I’m beginning this blog post under the assumption that the average Science Based Medicine reader is more intelligent, more motivated, and more health conscious than your typical Jane or Joe Blow. As such, most of you probably visit your friendly neighborhood dentist for cleanings and checkups twice a year just like the toothpaste manufacturers American Dental Association recommends. And if you’re like 99% of the patients my dental hygienists and I see in my practice, you get encouraged/chided/scolded to floss more. Because we all know no one flosses like they’re supposed to and that flossing is absolutely the best thing a person can do for his or her oral health, right? We even have posters that have witty quips like “Only Floss Those Teeth You Want To Keep!” Pretty clever, huh? You have to get up pretty early in the morning to be funnier than a dentist. (more…)
Fluoridated water: Panacea or poison? Probably neither.
One of the overriding themes of the Science Based Medicine blog is to use rigorous science when evaluating any health claim – be it medical, dental, dietary, fitness, or any other assertion put forth with the intention of improving one’s health. Once the scientific evidence is evaluated as to efficacy, there are other criteria which must be taken into consideration, such as ease of administration, costs, possible adverse effects, and so on. Benefits have to be carefully weighed against risks to properly determine any appropriate course of action. For example, if a new pill is developed which is significantly better at , say, managing hypertension than existing medications, but it kills 10% of patients taking it, it obviously would not be the drug of choice. Conversely, if a proposed treatment, say homeopathy, is touted as being 100% safe with no side effects, but has absolutely zero benefits, it too would not be a recommended treatment. It’s a complicated and often ambiguous algorithm, and is imperfect due to the impossibility of attempting to quantify non-quantifiable values and qualities. (more…)
[Editor’s Note: I’m pleased to announce that Grant Ritchey has agreed to join SBM as a regular. He’ll be writing about dental science and pseudoscience every four weeks on Sunday. (I swear, we’ll get up to seven day a week publishing if it kills me—or the other bloggers.) Grant will be starting with science, but I’m sure he’ll soon be discussing all the sorts of claims about dentistry and dental disease that are—how shall I put it?—less than science-based soon enough.]
Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a sleep-related breathing disorder in which the airway is partially or completely blocked during sleep. Although little or no air is flowing, the person continues to attempt to breathe. Typically, cessations in breathing last longer than 10 seconds per episode, but can last over a minute and usually occur multiple times during sleep. This can lead to poor sleep quality and precipitous drops in blood oxygenation levels over an extended period of time. This potentially life-threatening condition is frighteningly prevalent, especially in adults over 40, and it is estimated that 80-90% of OSA goes undiagnosed, further compounding the problem.
When a person experiences multiple apneic episodes during the night, the brain responds by alerting the body, resulting in increased efforts to breathe, gasping, and arousal from sleep. These frequent waking events, combined with lowered oxygen levels, can lead to the signs, symptoms, and sequelae of obstructive sleep apnea. Typically, OSA sufferers snore loudly, then are silent for 10-30 seconds as the airway is blocked. This is followed by choking, snorting, or gasping sounds when their airway reopens.
With some degree of sadness I recently “outed” a former co-resident of mine who has turned to the dark side and begun putting money-making before truth and science. Without any clear evidence of benefit beyond placebo, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is now being marketed aggressively as a cure-all for sports injuries. And at about $300 per injection (the NYT reports $2000/treatment), there’s plenty of money to be made.
Like the fake “stem cell” clinics in Russia (where, according to Sanjay Gupta’s recent book, Chasing Life, a person’s fat cells are harvested, washed, and re-injected into their blood stream), PRP also involves injection of autologous body fluids. Essentially, a small amount of blood is drawn from the patient, centrifuged, and the plasma supernatant is then injected directly into tendons and/or joints. After a series of 3 injections (one/month), most sports injuries are “cured.” Of course, most injuries would heal themselves in three months anyway. (more…)