[HN Gopher] A type of bacteria that causes dental plaque was fou...
___________________________________________________________________
A type of bacteria that causes dental plaque was found in 50% of
colon cancers
Author : _xerces_
Score : 60 points
Date : 2024-03-21 20:43 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nbcnews.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nbcnews.com)
| Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote:
| > it was unclear how it could withstand the journey through the
| gut
|
| Boy do I have great news for them about a group of people with a
| proclivity of putting their mouths where they shouldn't.
| swatcoder wrote:
| I assume I saw this downvoted because people get defensive
| about intimacies they enjoy or because of the snarky tone, but
| this is actually a very astute insight into a recent cultural
| change that might legitimately play some role.
|
| It wasn't a very common practice in earlier generations, it
| became an increasingly common practice in newer generations,
| and the shift could very easily produce unstudied consequences
| to health at scale (whether this or other things).
| situationista wrote:
| Do you have any reliable evidence to back up your assertion
| that the activity in question "wasn't a very common practice
| in earlier generations"? The fact that something isn't openly
| discussed rarely means it's not happening...
| iammjm wrote:
| Considering the popularity of porn and its obvious impact
| on sexual practices (monkey see, monkey do) plus the higher
| hygiene standards I would imagine butt-eating is more
| widespread now then ever. I'd also imagine cleaning the
| soon to be eaten butt would lower the risk
| nick__m wrote:
| You got the infection route backwards, the cancer causing
| plaque bacteria migrate from mouth to butt !
|
| But more seriously it's a gram negative bacteria so it
| has a polysaccharide armor that could resist a passage
| through the digestive system.
| swatcoder wrote:
| I mean, I can't speak for what was unmentionably hot in the
| 19th century or whatever, but there are many many living
| people who were plenty free-spirited during the 20th
| century and are quite open about what they did and do get
| up to, and many graphic literary and media accounts of the
| same.
|
| There are also many _much_ older literary sources on
| practice and technique that are quite rich and detailed but
| don 't really give it much attention.
|
| You're correct that none of that can provide
| _authoritative_ counter-evidence to the claim that it 's
| always been as popular and widespread as it is today, but
| given that many practices do come in and out of fashion,
| it's easier for most to assume that the particular quiet of
| the oral and literary historical record about this is
| because it wasn't popular than that it is the one secret
| thing that nobody blabbed about in topical literature or
| ran across much in their own experience. I didn't even
| think it's recent, dramatic rise in popularity was
| contentious until you pushed back on it just now.
|
| I'd personally put the burden of proof on demonstrating
| that it _was_ similarly common rather than that it _wasn
| 't_. But I would understand those determined to disagree.
|
| There are cultural trends and fashions in intimate
| practice, though, whether or not you accept that this is
| one of them.
| wewtyflakes wrote:
| > It wasn't a very common practice in earlier
| generations, it became an increasingly common practice in
| newer generations
|
| ...followed by...
|
| > I mean, I can't speak for what was unmentionably hot in
| the 19th century or whatever
|
| ...seems to indicate you should not have been so
| confident in your initial assertion. A great number of
| things were likely less mention-able in prior
| generations, including the act of hetero-normative sex; I
| suspect people had plenty of sex then, considering we
| exist at all.
| karaterobot wrote:
| > The fact that something isn't openly discussed rarely
| means it's not happening...
|
| Surely not being openly discussed isn't evidence of it
| being extremely prevalent either. And given that, it's
| really hard to imagine reliable evidence one way or the
| other. But the person you're responding to did not make an
| obviously ridiculous statement. We all know it's not
| provable, but I'll happily give them the benefit of the
| doubt here.
| mathgeek wrote:
| I assume the reason for the downvoting is because gp called
| out the people rather than just stating what the activity is.
| This is leading to us assuming what each responder considers
| the most likely activity.
| elwebmaster wrote:
| I don't know about that but what I can tell you was a very
| common practice in all earlier generations was drinking hard
| liquor. What does it do to bacteria?
| ZunarJ5 wrote:
| This is not what the historical record says at all, actually
| hilariously quite the opposite and this assumption is quite
| modern and common especially in the West.
|
| https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-08-03/young-
| ad...
|
| For one, quite famous historical example see the Kama Sutra.
| It does not take more than a quick Google search to find a
| million other examples, eg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Er
| otic_art_in_Pompeii_and_He...
|
| Check out this AskHistorians thread. https://www.reddit.com/r
| /AskHistorians/comments/17zztg/how_c...
| playerm1 wrote:
| I prefer syrup
| wewtyflakes wrote:
| What group of people?
| jfrbfbreudh wrote:
| people
| xen2xen1 wrote:
| Toddlers? That was my first thought..
| jjk166 wrote:
| So you're saying it is now scientifically proven that butt-
| chugging mouthwash both prevents and cures cancer, and that young
| people especially benefit?
| sva_ wrote:
| I don't think mouthwash is selective like that
| culopatin wrote:
| The only thing you could extrapolate is that using mouth wash
| may reduce the activity of that bacteria. Anything else would
| have to be proven.
| wstrange wrote:
| Which might have other unintended side effects!
|
| See [0] where mouthwash use is correlated with increased risk
| of hypertension
|
| [0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31709856/
| culopatin wrote:
| Also bacteria communities are very hard to study because
| one dying might make another one that was under control
| grow out of control and cause its own set of issues.
| blipvert wrote:
| Given the high alcohol content of mouthwash, this seems like a
| good way to get very drunk very quickly
| metadat wrote:
| Reputable mouthwash products no longer include alcohol, it's
| been deemed undesirable because it dries out your mouth.
| ProfessorLayton wrote:
| I tried Crest's alcohol-free mouthwash:
|
| Pros:
|
| - It worked _really well_ , fresh breath for hours.
|
| Cons:
|
| - It nuked my taste buds for just a long.
|
| I'm back on the boozy mouth wash (Listerine og formula)
| zoklet-enjoyer wrote:
| I like xylitol mouthwash. Xyloburst is good
| ggm wrote:
| Read up on throat and mouth cancer from mouthwash
| bugbuddy wrote:
| Mouthwash containing alcohol to be exact
| Grimblewald wrote:
| The problem with proving something is bad is it takes
| generations. What they replaced alcohol with is likely no
| better, like BPA substitites.
| NegativeLatency wrote:
| Seems to be pretty low risk, do you know of some better
| sources that I couldn't find?
|
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10681539/
|
| > We found evidence that a high frequency of mouthwash use
| may be associated with an increased risk of oral cancer.
| However, despite the biological plausibility for this
| association, we suggest caution upon interpretation of our
| findings due to the few number of studies that have
| investigated the mouthwash use frequency, which should be
| considered.
| basisword wrote:
| There's a lot of positivity in this article about how this
| knowledge could help develop new drugs. But it seems the current
| reality is that this bacteria is becoming more common and blocks
| current cancer drugs. Can anyone with more knowledge on this
| explain further? Are outlooks getting worse until we find
| something that can deal with the bacteria discussed in the
| article?
| A_D_E_P_T wrote:
| That the F.nucleatum bacterium is associated with colon cancer
| has been known for some time, e.g.:
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27876571/
|
| It is also associated with "poor rates of both overall survival
| and progression-free survival" in cervical cancer:
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33197886/
|
| And it is "associated with shorter survival" when found in
| esophageal cancer: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27769987/
|
| It is also linked to gastric cancer:
| https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-18596-0
|
| All in all, it's obviously a pretty nasty little customer. It
| might be worth screening for it, and attempting to eliminate it
| if possible.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| Vaccine candidate?
| j-bos wrote:
| There's a benign bacteria being sold to outcompete it.
| NegativeLatency wrote:
| What's that?
| isk517 wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37634713
| rain_iwakura wrote:
| Have there been any studies that show that people treated with
| antibiotics against F. Nucleatum showed improved outcomes in any
| of comorbid diseases? I'm not saying it would actually improve
| anything but would be interesting to see. I assume there isn't
| enough momentum to run a study like that.
| boring-alterego wrote:
| Maybe with this we can combine teeth into normal insurance.
| nrau wrote:
| My dentist has been on me for years that flossing is important
| for your health for more than just teeth. He explained to me
| recently the role it plays in toughening up your gums
| (essentially callusing your gums from the repeated abrasion of
| the dental floss) so that bacteria cannot thrive in there, which
| they otherwise easily do. And that this bacteria can cause you
| all kinds of health issues, including cancer.
|
| If you search around you'll find a lot of articles from the
| dental community that talk about similar benefits from flossing.
|
| After years of being lazy and ignoring their advice, this finally
| got me into regularly flossing!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-03-21 23:00 UTC)