by gdudeman on 5/15/24, 4:29 PM with 153 comments
by SkyMarshal on 5/15/24, 5:22 PM
https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/xylitol-101
(Also if you have pets, make sure they don't get any, xylitol isn't good for them, especially dogs)
by meew0 on 5/15/24, 6:00 PM
by maxbond on 5/15/24, 5:12 PM
I imagine that you could, at least on paper, create a Rube Goldberg machine in their genes that, say, killed them if they produced lactic acid, and made it very difficult to delete these genes without destroying their ability to reproduce. But you'll probably also handicap them in the process and make it difficult for them to adapt to competitive adaptations from other bacteria.
by koeng on 5/15/24, 7:16 PM
I do not buy that it is dangerous. However, I haven't seen any statistics showing the frequency of mutacin-1140 or its efficiency. Back in 2015 when I was a teen I did an experiment using colicin V (an E.coli one - I was planning on engineering E.coli Nissile to replace my current gut E.coli with something more fun. Got kicked out of the science fair for that one - https://keonigandall.com/posts/colicins.html ). Turns out, you need a sizable portion of the population to get takeover. I haven't seen ANY data on the population percentage necessary for takeover with this strain. Nor have I seen statistics of its natural occurrence percentage.
I wanted to modify the strain to have GFP expression, so I can have my own little engineered biome for myself that is showable at parties and such, but it looks like they removed comE :( will have to start from an original strain instead, I guess.
by seventyone on 5/15/24, 7:45 PM
WHAT IF... the mass increase in colon cancers in young people is due to gut bacteria colonies being taken over by a strain of bacteria in mouths that also survives stomach acids? What if that is causing the huge increase in IBS? What if the high carb diets and alternative sugars being consumed at mind boggling rates is a root cause? That the oral bacteria has been overtaken by a strain optimized for these carbs but is actively harmful to our bodies?
And what if fixing it is a treatment like this?
I'm willing to gamble.
Signed,
older millenial who has suffered with IBS for years
edit: If I could get a fecal transplant procedure in the USA to replace my gut colony I totally would.
edit2: fun fact -- did you know Sucralose accumulates in the environment because almost nothing breaks it down? it's pretty close to being a forever chemical. We can tell how much treated sewage injected into the water table is leaking into the ocean by measuring the amount of Sucralose in the ocean waters near the shoreline. That and nitrogen. But glug glug drink up those sugar free sodas and energy drinks!
by canucker2016 on 5/15/24, 5:20 PM
from https://www.aapd.org/globalassets/media/publications/archive...
"In addition, xylitol has a number of other effects on S mutans that may account for some of its clinical effects in caries reduction. Short-term consumption of xylitol is associated with decreased S mutans levels in both saliva and plaque.15 Long-term habitual consumption of xylitol appears to have a selective effect on S mutans strains. This results in selection for populations that are less virulent and less capable of adhering to tooth surfaces and, thus, are shed more easily from plaque into saliva."
by buildsjets on 5/15/24, 6:12 PM
It's hard to find a website discussing it that is not paid for by a toothpaste company, but here's something. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24660268/
by neilv on 5/15/24, 6:22 PM
No one is going to want to consult you, if you might blog about it, attacking them by name, so... if it was serious enough to burn professional bridges, why not go to the FDA, an Attorney General, a public health authority, an academic-professional society or journal, a Congressperson, or some other channel more official and credible than Substack?
by slibhb on 5/15/24, 4:58 PM
What about off-label medication?
I don't think taking Lumina is smart, more or less for the reasons the author ennumerates. I also think it's unlikely enough to hurt people that FDA approval shouldn't be required. There's a lot of stuff in that category!
by ryangs on 5/15/24, 6:26 PM
[1]: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/defying-cavity-lantern-biow....
by llsf on 5/15/24, 5:28 PM
by jeffbee on 5/15/24, 5:46 PM
by indigo0086 on 5/16/24, 2:42 PM
Blogger trying to convince us he's presenting a good faith article challenge: impossible
by Beijinger on 5/17/24, 2:44 PM
https://expatcircle.com/cms/how-to-clean-your-teeth-and-save...
by dur-randir on 5/16/24, 6:30 AM
by refulgentis on 5/15/24, 6:06 PM
He's an investor!
by JohnFen on 5/15/24, 7:47 PM
by julianeon on 5/15/24, 5:35 PM
by infotropy on 5/15/24, 11:04 PM
I don’t eat a lot of processed foods or foods high in sugar, but I don’t completely abstain from them either.
Nothing to do with Lumina directly, but I’ve always been curious about my dental microbiome and how something about it is different from others.
I often worry about new products like Lumina upsetting whatever balance I’ve got going on.
by jrd259 on 5/15/24, 7:33 PM
by Aurornis on 5/15/24, 5:08 PM
The "rationalist community" has always been quirky and edgy, but iterations in recent years have felt increasingly reactionary and contrarian at all costs. Being anti-FDA has been a meme in the rationalist community for several years, especially since Scott Alexander (Slate Star Codex / Astral Codex Ten) started writing anti-FDA pieces. (Side note: The conservative firebrand they're talking about is a person who was caught using a pseudonym to post extremely biased, racist material, who has somehow remained prominent in the community despite the revelations).
This appears to have primed the community for "FDA bad" takes, which has triggered their contrarian tendencies to assume that anything that goes against the FDA must therefore be good.
A supplement maker publicly defying the FDA and pushing out a miracle treatment without the normal rigor of human trials and safety reviews is the type of behavior that would have triggered skepticism from the rationalist community. Yet because the community has been primed with "FDA bad, anti-FDA good" memes for years and the person pitching this supplement is vaguely connected to the rationalist community, this product has triggered a lot of adoration and praise from the community.
The product also exists in a space that is difficult to disprove: The effects of any anti-cavity product can only really be shown over very long periods of time in controlled settings. Anyone who gets a cavity while using this product will surely be dismissed as having a pre-existing cavity growing, or poor oral hygiene, or being a statistical anomaly, or any other number of excuses. At the same time, I'm sure we're about to hear endless anecdotes from people who have been taking the supplement and haven't had any cavities (while ignoring the fact that most people also don't get cavities in a given year, even without this magic probiotic).
It feels like the perfect storm for a grift, and this company is taking the lead and running with it. It's weird that a blog post advising some caution and skepticism for a supplement pusher making extraordinary claims who has refused to participate in the normally expected clinical trials. It's equally weird to see the self-described rationalist community throwing scientific rigor to the wind and embracing marketer's claims.
I don't entirely understand what's going on here, but I think it's strange that an article advising a modicum of skepticism for supplement pushers is now considered a contrarian take in the rationalist community.
by deelowe on 5/15/24, 5:08 PM
That said, I'm not sure I learned anything new after reading this.