15 ms·
Gene-Engineered Mouth Bacteria
- DrScientist 3y agoIsn't gum disease more of a long term problem that cavities ( assuming you don't have a ridiculously sugary drink diet ).
- mytailorisrich 3y agoGreat except for the ethanol thing...
- c7DJTLrn 3y agoNo I haven't been drinking boss... it's the bacteria in my mouth!
- matthewtse 3y ago> It is possible to genetically engineer Streptococcus mutans, the dominant human mouth bacteria, to produce ethanol instead of cavity-causing lactic acid I hope it's in such small quantities that it wouldn't cause any alcoholic effects? Nonetheless, such a simple website with short and concise copy. Wasn't expecting that for a biotech startup. Hope it works, cavities suck!
- ceejayoz 3y agoAuto-brewery syndrome! https://www.cbc.ca/radio/quirks/oct-26-2019-world-s-loudest-bird-a-six-fingered-lemur-a-microbrewery-in-your-gut-and-more-1.5334176/beer-belly-a-rare-yeast-infection-makes-the-gut-into-a-microbrewery-1.5334188 https://www.cbc.ca/radio/quirks/oct-26-2019-world-s-loudest-...
- ILMostro7 3y agoThis is hilarious. "a walking brewerey". https://i0.wp.com/thebeerthrillers.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Pregnant-Bender.webp?resize=660,509 https://i0.wp.com/thebeerthrillers.com/wp-content/uploads/20... Plus, the first sentence. >Michelle Giannotto knew something was wrong with her husband Donato after he had an infection following a simple nose surgery. The guy's name is Donato Giannotto. Not being mean, just fun to say. Edit: not at all funny and irrelevant, apparently.
- isitmadeofglass 3y agoProbably not going to generate more ethanol than you already get in your morning cup of orange juice
- apsec112 3y agoThe amounts produced are tiny. See the safety FAQ here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mDJCTO2QySmQOZQcajYReDCA1MFpKs-EZ5E0VNu50Fo/edit?usp=drivesdk https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mDJCTO2QySmQOZQcajYReDCA...
- fauigerzigerk 3y agoThe quantities are too small to make you drunk, but does it increase your risk of mouth cancer to have this in your mouth all day every day?
- eqvinox 3y agoBetter question: do any increased risks from this outweigh the risks incurred from poorer dental health and procedures to address these? (particularly at high age)?
- lvh 3y agoIt's pretty unlikely to cause an intoxicating effect: it's surrounded by the mouth, so it'll be taken up almost instantly. It never gets to accumulate, so I'd expect the impact is far less than even something like kombucha. I wonder what the religious implications might be.
- thsksbd 3y agoUnless the bacteria makes it past the stomach and inoculates the intestines. Then you get nice and drunk every time you have cake.
- gostsamo 3y agoYeah, sure. A milliliter of etanol a month versus pain and drop of quality of life. Who would choose that!
- gweinberg 3y agoI'd be willing to give it a shot.
- AnimalMuppet 3y agoPun intended? If so, nicely done!
- fbdab103 3y ago>The average human digestive system produces approximately 3 g of ethanol per day through fermentation of its contents. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_metabolism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_metabolism
- WD-42 3y agoSo are you just drunk all the time instead?
- clarkrinker 3y agoSmall price to pay
- tgv 3y agoTooth decay or brain and liver damage? Or reducing sugar?
- Almondsetat 3y agoOur body can assimilate 1 Alcoholic Unit per day without any problems. I doubt those bacteria would produce anything in that order of magnitude so I truly don't understand your reply. Did you just blindly write: "alcohol therefore bad"?
- cf141q5325 3y agoNot sure why this was downvoted. The dose makes the poison here >The average human digestive system produces approximately 3 g of ethanol per day through fermentation of its contents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_metabolism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_metabolism
- thsksbd 3y agoUnless it gets past the stomach, into the intestine and ferments most of the carbs you eat instead of traces of the carbs ingested
- teddyh 3y ago> stuck in patent hell […] for decades Patents only last for 20 years.
- bhauer 3y agoSo a patent that predates their work could, at most, frustrate them for 20 years, or two decades. I have no idea who these guys are or what patents they're referring to, but the use of the word "decades" here is not obviously deceptive.
- danpalmer 3y agoTechnically yes, but there are caveats to this. Drug companies regularly create new variants with no distinguishing characteristics but which reset the patent clock, using litigation, trademarks, secrets, and other tactics to prevent the original variants being used.
- malermeister 3y ago...which is exactly what the folks at the link are proposing. From their Investment Proposal doc: > However, we can create a new, derivative strain of SMaRT, which would be under new IP protections, and therefore, would very likely be of interest to a large pharma company.
- mrosett 3y agoThat’s the freedom-to-operate side. But “Patent hell” could also be the lack of clear IP that would allow a commercializer to capture a return on developing this. Not much incentive to spend tens of millions on trials if at the of the process the product can be sold by anyone.
- jackblemming 3y agoThis sounds like great additional protection, but I would still like to brush and floss to get the remaining food grime out of my mouth. Meaning it really doesn’t change my life all that much. It would certainly be a game changer for lower income families.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jfengel 3y agoGood choice. Gingivitis is a deeper problem than cavities. Without your gums you lose not just your teeth, but it can become a systemic infection. And it's much harder to fix than a cavity.
- kelnos 3y agoI don't think anyone is suggesting this would replace brushing and flossing. Plenty of people still have problems with cavities, despite taking good care of their teeth (seems genetics plays an outsized role in tooth/gum health). Not having to worry about cavities would likely be of great value to them.
- SomaticPirate 3y agoSo its patent encumbered? If there was a time for the “bio-hackers” this would be it. I heard everyone can perform some basic CRISPR so could we make this bacteria at home?
- thriftwy 3y agoI wonder why it does not happen naturally if they outcompete normal bacteria, though. Bacteria has great speed of evolution.
- ejstronge 3y agoThe added genetic factors may, themselves, be exogenous and genetically modified. Your argument does make sense over thousands of years, however.
- MagicMoonlight 3y agoBecause there's no downside to the current system they use. They only out-compete if you modify them in other ways to make them more successful in addition to the change you want.
- 4death4 3y agoNow just to engineer them to produce menthol instead.
- smileysteve 3y agoProbiora seems similar, but less sticky (it recommends a daily dissolvable tablet instead a once a decade tablet) and instead of producing ethanol, produces hydrogen peroxide. https://probiorahealth.com/product/probiora/ https://probiorahealth.com/product/probiora/
- echelon 3y agoWhat happens when these get into the esophagus and produce oxide species? Extra free radicals can't be great for your DNA. I wonder what the long term cancer outcomes would be.
- irdc 3y agoHydrogen peroxide producing bacteria are far more of a known factor than ethanol producing bacteria where it comes to long-term interactions with human mucosa, the former being a natural part of human vaginal flora.
- waihtis 3y agoInteresting product, but the site has one of the worst GDPR controls ive seen - silently redirects to Google if you attempt to view the site from an EU IP address. Thought my computer is going nuts
- ta1243 3y agoNot just EU, Switzerland too. That tells me everything I need to know, the site owner simply wants to steal my personal data and use it against me.
- lwansbrough 3y agoSurely that’s the reason and not the EU penalty for simply storing cookies “without consent” being so severe as to practically negate the value of EU citizens on the internet.
- dgreensp 3y agoCharging $20,000 for a dose? Really?
- nemo44x 3y agoWhat’s a fair price? Spending well over $20k on dental work over a lifetime is easy for many people. Adjust for inflation and it’s a steal. Cavities often lead to eventual root canals which require a crown which one day will probably require an extraction and a dental post and prosthetic tooth. That is probably around $8k or more for a single tooth at todays rates.
- adastra22 3y agoThe time-value of money means the adjustment goes the other way. $20k is absolutely insane. That’s three times the cost of a full orthodontic treatment. They’ll get a handful of customers, if that. $2k is more likely as a price point for mass adoption.
- zugi 3y ago$20k is likely the price for early adopters, while production rates are low. Within a year or three the price would likely fall to some stable long-term rate. $2k indeed sounds about right.
- nemo44x 3y agoHealthcare (including dental) costs have outpaced inflation though. The price of all those procedures is likely to increase more than inflation. Similar to how it would be a bargain to have paid for a college education today 20 years ago.
- guraf 3y agoThe average American probably spends about 20k in their lifetime, that's probably where they got their pricing from. They get a check-up a year and a handful of fillings with some prosthetics if they live long enough. Which totals to around 20k. The average American also cannot afford 20k in one shot they can't even afford 2k.
- crazygringo 3y agoThis is certainly an interesting idea, but there's absolutely no way for anyone to judge whether the claim on this page is bulletproof true, something plausible worth researching more, or just total nonsense. But the fact that there isn't a single link to any scientific paper or evidence whatsoever, or even a single person's name linked to the site (or source of funding or anything), makes me assume this is just spam or a scam. Apsec112, why did you submit this? How did you find it? Can you give us any context to suggest that anything about this is legit? And anybody else -- are there actual published results from legit scientists on this? Is this a real thing, or just make-believe? Because this is an extraordinary claim, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Not just 11 sentences. Edit: I missed that at the very bottom of the page there's a link to a... Google Drive folder? [1] But it's disorganized and not exactly, well, professional. I can't make heads or tails of anything in it, or find anything that suggests credibility. [1] https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/18ZDSe92LgLmS0sUbosvNxByii_1kjnEj https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/18ZDSe92LgLmS0sUb...
- apsec112 3y agoHi! These are friends of mine. There is much more detail in the Google Drive (linked from the About page): https://drive.google.com/drive/u/2/folders/18ZDSe92LgLmS0sUbosvNxByii_1kjnEj https://drive.google.com/drive/u/2/folders/18ZDSe92LgLmS0sUb...
- kelnos 3y agoSorry, but we don't know you either, so a word-of-mouth referral doesn't tell us much here. The Google Drive link doesn't provide anything substantive, like links to peer-reviewed, published research.
- apsec112 3y agoThis comment describes the research: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37635401 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37635401
- ysavir 3y ago
- greatgib 3y agoLooks interesting but too good to be true. No one knows what is the catch? Or why the patent or technology would be stuck for so long if so good? Also, would it really be safe to change the chimical equilibrium of the mouth?
- vitro 3y agoWhat if you spit it out? Or what about french-kissing someone, can you give this bacteria to the other person that way?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- declan_roberts 3y agoYes I believe that would happen if it outcompetes “native” non-gmo bacteria.
- malermeister 3y agoGood luck selling it for 20k/dose then.
- sijmen 3y agoThe FAQ in the google drive linked on the page tries to answer these questions. Will this spread to everyone I kiss? It’s very unlikely in non-immunocompromised adults. However, if you’re concerned, you should avoid kissing anyone taking oral antibiotics, or children. [...] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mDJCTO2QySmQOZQcajYReDCA1MFpKs-EZ5E0VNu50Fo/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mDJCTO2QySmQOZQcajYReDCA...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- kuchenbecker 3y agoThe company that made the bacteria gets less money and any ill-effects will need active management going forward. The key is whether the unknown active management of this bacteria is preferable to the immense expense and problems of tooth decay.
- swader999 3y agoGood luck at the check stop after this.
- bagels 3y agoCall to action is to give them my email to learn more, but no description of what I'd actually get. I'd love to see links to papers, news articles, or some description of what they plan to do next.
- malermeister 3y agoFrom the pitch deck in their linked Google Drive it looks like the patent on the original strain expired and their whole idea is to create a slightly different strain they can patent again and sell for 20k/dose. Not quite as altruistic as their initial framing makes it seem... Cool concept though!
- Analemma_ 3y agoDoing a couple Google/Twitter searches for this company it's pretty obvious it's coming out of the Berkeley-area EA/rationalist cluster, which automatically makes me pretty skeptical. These people don't exactly have a stellar track record of medical startups (recall all the hype around MetaMed, which delivered precisely nothing).
- apsec112 3y agoLongevity biotech came from a similar milieu and has been doing very well: https://english.elpais.com/economy-and-business/2023-07-17/the-boom-of-the-anti-aging-market-how-to-get-people-to-live-to-be-120-and-in-good-health.html https://english.elpais.com/economy-and-business/2023-07-17/t... (along with AI companies of course)
- bastawhiz 3y ago> Longevity biotech came from a similar milieu and has been doing very well They're doing well numerically when it comes to funding but is there anyone who has actually lived materially longer as a result of the field?
- unsupp0rted 3y agoRay Kurzweil will outlive us all, if taking 200 pills a day works: https://www.wired.com/2008/03/ff-kurzweil/#:~:text=He%20is%20confident%20that%20the,his%20astounding%20predictions%20come%20true.&text=Kurzweil%20does%20not%20believe%20in,to%20organize%20them%20all%20himself https://www.wired.com/2008/03/ff-kurzweil/#:~:text=He%20is%2....
- luminouslow 3y agoI just cant take this seriously. Why are Americans so afraid of death?
- apsec112 3y ago
- dgrin91 3y agoThe question I always have with this type of stuff is: why is it not _already_ huge. Cavities were a big thing already in 1985. If this was a miracle cure in 1985 then I do not believe that this study would have ended in 'ok that was fun, back to normal life'. This has huge commercial potential if true, so the apparently implications is that there is something blocking that commercial application. Was it FDA? Was it side effectives? Is it impossible to scale this up? What is it that made this "miracle cure" just stop.
- lost_tourist 3y agoNow this topic has a huge grain of salt, but imagine something that one cheap treatment of basically wipes out an entire industry do you think that industry and associated ones wouldn't fight tooth and nail to buy it an bury it? I know it's been said the same thing about various engine designs, but just for the sake of argument I believe that's what they're saying here.
- dehrmann 3y agoDon't want to get too conspiratorial, but dentists make their money on cavities, not cleanings.
- gattilorenz 3y agoWhy are they not pushing against fluoride en masse, then?
- themagician 3y agoBecause they can charge $40-$80 (or more) for a fluoride treatment. It's actually how they make money on cleanings. If you don't opt for the fluoride treatment it's a wash.
- gattilorenz 3y agoI’ve never heard of fluoride treatment. I never had it, I don’t think that’s common in Europe. I was referring to fluoride in water and toothpaste.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- lusus_naturae 3y agoIt's easy enough to test this without investor money, you just need a simple kit and some dentures (not literally, I meant teeth essentially). The design of the experimental protocol is key.
- avidphantasm 3y agoSo wait, will this let me micro-dose alcohol at the same time?
- Filligree 3y agoThat happens all the time anyway, and your liver has no trouble keeping up. It’s a poison your body always knew how to handle, so long as you don’t reach megadoses of the stuff.
- MagicMoonlight 3y agoIf the bacteria is in the public domain, is there a way we could just order some and try it out ourselves? I'd be interested in being a test subject. They've got decades of evidence showing it had no side effects so it's not even a risky thing.
- fdye 3y agoSo within the existing population today there exist individuals who essentially never get cavities. The hypothesis for this has been 1. they don't eat sugar, or only fibrous foods, etc. 2. They have a genetic difference that builds stronger enamel or similar. I have never heard of anyone discussing bacteria in the mouth as a possible difference. Be interested to see if there is a natural strand that some people have present that could also be a culprit. There has been modest support for this concept in term of gut bacteria, i.e. thin people who donate their excrement to fat people seem to inoculate them with a gut biome that helps them lose weight, or deal with digestive issues.
- astrange 3y agoYou should assume that everything related to digestion is caused by gut bacteria. Nerds love saying things is "genetics" because they think it'd make humanities types mad if something was genetics. But it's like lupus. It's never genetics. (Except celiac.)
- BiteCode_dev 3y agoI'm 40 years old. Never had cavities. I eat plenty of sugar.
- fdye 3y agoScientist lurkers in the thread take note. We have a couple for the first cohort for testing to see if their mouth biome differs from base population. Inquiring minds want to know!
- BiteCode_dev 3y agoAnecdotally, none of my girlfriends seem to have developped any similar immunity. If the article is right, my flora should have replace theirs on the long run, no?
- lost_tourist 3y agoI'd be willing to bet you drink a lot of water and also brush regularly. Am I right? Because that's what I do and I've 2 cavities in 40 years of life.
- midnitewarrior 3y ago> "to produce ethanol instead of cavity-causing lactic acid" So, brush your teeth and have ethanol in your mouth forever? I'm curious if this would be of high enough concentrations to show up on a breathalyzer, or if it would cause problems for people in recovery from alcohol or drugs.
- irdc 3y agoDon't forget alcohol is also a carcinogenic.
- h2odragon 3y agoI can see how this would have trouble attracting development funding. If your product is successful, people need one dose, ever. After some number have bought it the natural spread is likely to wipe out the rest of the market. It might be "pirated" with a kiss or a shared lollipop? Against that, you have the entire dental industry, an established market of i dunno how much per year but substantial. They're already well versed in selling people intangibles packaged with inert ingredients. They've got a long history of "science to order" (9 out of 10 dentists agree!). They've got a large body of known sadists to call on for the less civil dispute resolution processes they might choose to employ. I salute the folks behind this effort. Even if its all fairy dust you've put your lives on the line.
- imjonse 3y agoThey have a pitch deck lamenting 90% of US adults have cavities, and they are 2x likely to get untreated if you are poor, then propose to market this for 20k$/dose. Saving the world, again, startup style.
- boredpeter 3y ago$20k per dose Jesus H Christ. Rent seeking galore. Hopefully the patent has run out by now and others can get in on the action and make it affordable. There’s no way in hell this could possibly cost $20k. Is capitalism ever going to produce innovation that’s affordable to regular people again and not just benefiting the profiteering VC parasite class?
- malermeister 3y agoThe patent has expired. The whole pitch here is to modify the tech a bit so they can patent it again and charge 20k/dose.
- tptacek 3y agoI'm not going to say I buy any of this or that I think it's a good pitch, but you see these numbers for new treatments because the math doesn't work out for the go-to-market without them. When the product is established, the price goes down.
- jefftk 3y ago> Hopefully the patent has run out by now and others can get in on the action and make it affordable. The patent has run out, and in the ~20y since it expired no one has tried to revive the idea. Why are you faulting the people who are finally picking the idea back up instead of all the people who could have but didn't over the last ~20y?
- boredpeter 3y agoI’m faulting them because it’s nothing more than a get rich quick scheme. Another comment even noted they are slightly tweaking it so they can get another patent for it. The government should be funding this and making it available to the general population at an affordable price instead of just having the free market “figure it out” and making something affordable only to the ultra rich. But the US is a country where the government isn’t allowed to do anything and everything has to be left to the free market which nowadays is nothing more than a bunch of hyper capitalistic rent seekers that are only interested in maximizing profit at the expense of everyone else.
- queuebert 3y agoThe FDA requirements for the original clinical trial were wild: "...the FDA required them to find a cohort of 300 healthy 18-30 year olds who lived alone, not near a school zone, and had fully removable teeth." I can see why this makes sense, but no wonder they failed at enrolling the cohort.
- tim333 3y ago"fully removable teeth"?
- smsm42 3y agoFor FDA, never permitting it is a completely acceptable outcome, and that's why it probably will never be permitted in the US. Unless somebody will find a reason to spend many billions of dollars to make it happen, which I don't foresee happening. I wonder if there's a chance in other countries, or they have their own FDAs?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- konschubert 3y agoWhy the "not near a school zone"?
- anticensor 3y agoBecause of ethanol?
- scarby2 3y agoMaybe. You could possibly now fall foul of certain alcohol production laws....
- bagels 3y agoMaybe some attempt to prevent a contagion that would rapidly spread to many households through the children?
- 3y ago
- PeterStuer 3y agoEvolution is all about optimising tradeoffs. So what is the downside of this "miracle cure"?
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> what is the downside of this "miracle cure"? The strain is probably less tough than its wild type.
- themagician 3y ago"This has, to our knowledge, caused no ill effects since." That's the kicker. Damn near everything has side effects. How and why the FDA approves some things but not others is a quagmire, but the truth is that almost everything has side effects. Sometimes it feels like every approved drug ad you see on TV will have some lawsuit 20-30 years later. Look at where we are right now with ozempic. We know one of the side effects is thyroid cancer and doctors are prescribing it left and right while there is money to be made. In 10 years there will be a multi-billion dollar settlement for "misrepresenting the risks".
- brian_cunnie 3y ago> doctors are prescribing it left and right while there is money to be made I think that's painting with a broad brush the motivations of doctors. Case in point: when diagnosed with diabetes, my doctor suggested attempting a modified diet before she'd prescribe medications (such as ozempic). She got no money from a modified diet. Furthermore, I don't think she would've gotten any money had she prescribed medication; in the US, there's a "Medicaid/Medicare anti-kickback statute" [0] I suspect that those motivated by money would be more inclined to pursue a lucrative career in finance rather than the long, arduous, and expensive path of becoming a doctor. [0] https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/it-legal-physician-receive-payment-prescribing-drug/2003-07 https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/it-legal-physic...
- jjk166 3y agoThyroid cancer is one of the least dangerous cancers being easily treated and not generally life threatening. Obviously it would be nice not to get it, but a small increase to the risk of thyroid cancer for a substantially reduced risk of cardiovascular issues and complications from diabetes seems like a very sound medical decision.
- ethbr1 3y agoOzempic, aka Semaglutide, the antidiabetic drug also being sold for weight loss. (For those like me who didn't know) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaglutide https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaglutide
- 3y ago
- jozvolskyef 3y agoA conversation with my friend who was a dentistry student, ~2013. > [The friend, let's call her L, trying to dissuade me from drinking some fizzy drink] > J: But I won't get a cavity if the liquid doesn't touch my teeth. > L: Cavities are caused by the ensuing low ph environment, not by contact with teeth > J: Does that mean I can drink as much of it as I want as long as I rinse my mouth with water afterwards? > L, with a hint of defeat in her voice: yes. After this conversation, I started the practice of rinsing my mouth with water after eating anything sugary or associated with tooth decay, as well as using interdental toothbrushes. My rate of cavities dropped from one on most years to zero - I haven't had a cavity since. Even the one noticed by my dentist at the time and left untreated for being too small hasn't developed yet, and that was ~ten years ago. On a sidenote, I have yet to find interdental toothbrushes whose use doesn't lead to ingesting nylon.
- _giorgio_ 3y agoNot sure that I understood what you're saying... You drink fizzy drinks during the day, and each time that you drink you rinse your mouth with water without brushing your teeth. And you only brush, say, before sleep, and this has reduced your cavities to zero? thanks
- stevesimmons 3y ago> I have yet to find interdental toothbrushes whose use doesn't lead to ingesting nylon. Use the interdental toothpicks made of wood.
- kaliszad 3y agoVery bad advice, as the brushes need to have specific sizes suitable for the spaces and the bristles actually reach more spaces and remove plaque. However, someone could manufacture the brushes from natural hair, e.g. from pigs as with other kinds of brushes.
- jjallen 3y agoWater also just dissolves the sugar and reduces the amount sitting in and on our teeth. I do this same thing and haven’t had a cavity in a very long time.
- i_am_a_squirrel 3y agoI saw this in popular mechanics magazine like 15 ish years ago as a kid and I haven't stopped thinking about what ever happened to it. I hope this happens!
- g42gregory 3y agoReplacing bacteria in your mouth with genetically engineered ones. What could possibly go wrong?
- tptacek 3y agoProbably nothing.
- thsksbd 3y agoUnless you have an antacid then swallow the bacteria. Then the bacteria, that transforms sugars and carbs into ethanol, gets past the stomach acid, populates the gut and you get a free buzz with no cavities everytime you eat a cracker.
- kelnos 3y agoThat's actually a thing! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto-brewery_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto-brewery_syndrome
- phkahler 3y agoAfter 40 years this should have spread to some of the population via kissing. ;-)
- lwansbrough 3y agoDoesn’t that lactic acid play a role in digestion?
- lcordier 3y agoWhere we not here before? GMO bacteria producing alcohol... https://www.cracked.com/article_18503_how-biotech-company-almost-killed-world-with-booze.html https://www.cracked.com/article_18503_how-biotech-company-al... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtPNaMphl04 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtPNaMphl04 Also lactic-acid keeps other mouth bacteria under control, do we really want to mess with the balance?
- inciampati 3y agoAnd there is little reason to believe that ethanol producing bacteria have a selective advantage. Why would they be maintained in someone's mouth microbiome?
- lcordier 3y agoMy worries are with translocation of oral bacteria. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6427756/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6427756/ Once it is in the gut you have Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) issues. (could have ;) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMWy2Rg6Ul4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMWy2Rg6Ul4
- yieldcrv 3y agopatent hell = our patent applications keep getting rejected for prior art from an expired existing patent, general ineligibility, and we have no moat and no capital
- thsksbd 3y agoThis a quick way to get auto-brewery syndrome.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- pierat 3y agoHmm I remember this from Omni magazine. Their claim was that people got icked out with "mutated bacteria".
- xeckr 3y agoWhy anyone would want to host bacteria that produce ethyl alcohol 24/7?
- SergeAx 3y ago> Estimated price point: > $20,000/dose Dammit, this will make Martin Shkreli feel like a petty shoplifter. I hope biohackers will soon pirate those bacteries and sell to everyone in need.
- justinclift 3y agoWonder if they're able to follow up with most of the people inoculated back in 1985, and find out how they're going now? Seems like an obvious thing to try, but am not seeing anything along those lines.
- ohyes 3y agoSeems like a product that would be difficult to monetize even with a patent as the bacteria outcompetes other oral microbiota. Which would make it just as possible to be treated via a nice deep tongue kiss. (Or you know, less grossly rinsing then getting swabbed with a sample from someone else).
- bkm 3y agoAlternatively, a non-intrusive supplement with DIM has recently been found effective against the Streptococcus Mutans bacteria. 3,3′-Diindolylmethane (DIM) decreased the Streptococcus mutans biofilm, a leading contributor to plaque and cavities, by 90%. Source: https://scitechdaily.com/90-reduction-scientists-discover-natural-molecule-that-eradicates-plaques-and-cavities/ https://scitechdaily.com/90-reduction-scientists-discover-na...
- k3lsi3r 3y agoMichael Laufer from the Four Thieves Vinegar Collective gave a talk that included a bit about this at a 2018 Defcon talk at the bio-hacking village. You can watch it here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzqEJM8B0h4&t=1935s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzqEJM8B0h4&t=1935s. Entire talk is quite entertaining but this segment always stuck with me since I get cavities fairly frequently.
- slama 3y agoHe gave a SkyTalk at DC30 on the same topic with a few more years of knowledge
- kelnos 3y agoPatent hell? Yes, I'd generally believe that, but given that it's been 38 years since 1985, any related patents should have expired years ago, no?
- kelnos 3y agoThis seems like a pretty huge caveat (from the "Methodology for Inoculation, and Caveats" doc in their linked GDrive): > Do not expose children under the age of five to this strain, including by sharing food or liquids with them. Disruptions to early microbiome development can carry through someone’s entire life.
- xivzgrev 3y agoFascinating stuff. The price is est $20k. Would you pay that to never get cavities? Seems a bit high given avg cost of cavities
- kaliszad 3y agoI would like to clear some things up about how cavities/ caries come to be. Source: my GF is an experienced dental hygienist with her own office in Prague, Czechia. You can assume that nobody is immune so the whole genetic resistance angle is a myth. With that cleared up, how does a cavity/ caries come to be? When we eat or drink the bacteria gets nutrients (any form of sugar) and builds up plaque and the bacteria create an acid. Because the plaque stays on our teeth above and even slightly bellow the gums (gingiva) and the bacteria likes to live there the effects are strongest where the plaque is. The bacteria and the resulting acid over time cause demineralisation, dissolves the calcium in the teeth. After some time this leads to decay which we describe as cavity/ caries. Also, the plaque can solidify into a build-up of tartar/ calculus which further provides a nice habitat for bacteria, causing gingivitis (inflamation of the gums - they become red and swollen) spreads the sulcus, basically splitting gums from the teeth over time which results in periodontitis, which is basically loss of the bone and other problems below the gums. Periodontitis can also exacerbate other illnesses such as diabetes, cardiovascular illnesses, possibly some allergies (active research). This can really only be fixed by a professional dentist or dental hygienist since removing the tartar, especially under the gums, is a precise and demanding. The procedure can be painful without local anesthetics. If you don't want all that do brush your teeth correctly each day. The 2 minutes number is myth again - do brush until the teeth are free from plaque. It is easier with a sonic/electric toothbrush, e.g. by Phillips or Oral B iO should be ok too. The brushing technique is very important, most people do this wrong. The brush should be at 45° to the sulcus (half of the bristles is on the gums the other on the tooth). Obviously also brush the top of the teeth. Each tooth basically has 5 surfaces, top and 4 sides. Don't forget to use correctly sized interdental brushes. Your dentist or dental hygienist should be able to help you find the correct sizes for specific spaces between teeth. (You will probably end up with TePe or Curaprox and probably more than one size.) You can use a solo brush too, which brushes exactly one tooth at a time. The bristles of the brush should be as soft as possible and removal of bigger amounts of plaque are done by spending more time instead of force/ pressure/ hardness/ abrasiveness. In addition to not replacement of interdental brushes, you can also use a super floss (the middle is made of a fluffy material) but learn a good technique so you don't hurt your gums, throw the thin waxed floss in the trash especially if you are not super handy/ careful as to not cut your gums. Also, the floss does not clean premolars and molars properly because of the shape of the teeth in interdental space (because of their concavity, imagine that the surface is basically made of two pillars). Do have a regular appointment with your dentist and dental hygienist. 2x a year should be enough with good hygiene. If you have more problems, the frequency of appointments will of course vary. They should definitely do at least intraoral x-rays each preventive appointment and a OrthoPantomoGraph in ~2 years.
- painelemental 3y agoThe rat/postrat scene is full of scams. Look up Rheos Propulsion lol - they’ve flipped to ‘muon weapons’ now and still desperate chasers throw money at them.
- hooverd 3y agoisn't that basically a one person show. chasers?
- willmadden 3y agoThere's a lot of thoughtful speculation and salesmanship, but no clinical data. Create a prototype product, get some volunteers, and after that is successful, raise some money to go through clinical trials with the FDA.
- chr1 3y agoA related question is if the same idea can be used for a deodorant: make a type of skin bacteria that does not produce odour and can outcompete other types of bacteria.
- acyou 3y agoAdding live organisms to complex living systems tends to have unpredictable and destabilizing consequences. Invasive species being introduced to ecosystems can have knock-on effects that go far beyond their immediate biome. The human body is a complex living system, and the consequences of perturbing that system are difficult to predict. There are probably also lots of "good" bacteria in the mouth and gut using salivary lactate. I could not begin to guess at the number of additional metabolic pathways happening that are related to this. Not to mention the mutacin production that they mention, that they think may also kill off some of the bacteria in the mouth, that hopefully isn't replaced with nasty S. aureus, C. difficile, Candida. The gut flora angle is just a whole other rabbit hole. In light of the potential benefits, the "reasons not to" might fall by the wayside, hopefully none of the cautions end up being a big deal. But the status quo doesn't suck that much, if you look at how bad it could be. Personally, I would like to see more resources go to diagnosis, study and understanding, rather than seeing people try to jump straight to the silver bullet and test on volunteers. Is it moral because they are "volunteers"? Are they really volunteers given that they would most likely get paid? More importantly - and I cannot emphasize this enough: If this was such a great and simple solution, evolution would have already given this mechanism to us to and other animals. There is (or was at some point) a very, very good reason that our bodies don't already do this.