Drinking Tea May Aid in Preventing Gum Disease

It may be a good thing to drink more tea.  A new study indicates that drinking tea may aid in preventing gum disease and prohibit cavities from developing. The information showed that three cups of tea each day battled bacteria, which led to a lower risk for gum disease and tooth decay.Black tea, specifically, possesses ingredients that fight certain bacteria like Lactobacillus and Streptococcus mutans, which are bacteria that cause gum disease. Three cups has become the recommended amount because the best results in fighting gum disease were shown by people consuming three to four cups of tea each day. The tea succeeds because it limits the amount of plaque acids released when eating.  The study demonstrated that the results were the same when sugar was added to the tea. Also, green tea produced similar results.  Previous studies on green tea determined that it could result in weight loss. This is accomplished by generating a larger expenditure of energy by the body and raising the body’s ability to burn fat.

dentistrytoday.com

Emotional Stress Could Cause Periodontal Disease

Emotional woes may place a strain on more than just your heart. According to the Academy of General Dentistry (AGD), emotional anxiety could affect your dental health.

 

"There's definitely a link between stress and dental health," says AGD spokesperson Nick Russo, DDS. "Stress affects the immune system, which fights against the bacteria that causes periodontal disease, making a person more prone to gum infection."

 

While stress has long been linked to heart troubles, researchers studied the effects of stress on dental health at the State University of New York at Buffalo, the University of North Carolina and the University of Michigan. More than 1,400 volunteers, ages 25 to 74, were studied to see how stress and coping abilities affect the risk for periodontal (gum) disease, which causes oral infection, inflamed and bleeding gums and loss of bone.

 

Those at greatest risk for periodontal disease were those who were highly emotional in dealing with financial problems. The oral health of those with financial troubles was compared with those who had other pressures, such as stress over children, spouse, single life or work. People strapped for cash had the most severe periodontal disease. But here's the good news: Those who dealt with their financial strain in an active and positive manner had no more risk of severe periodontal disease than those without money problems.

knowyourteeth.com     

Gene Associated with Longevity Also Regulates Circadian Clock

Human sleeping and waking patterns are largely governed by an internal circadian clock that corresponds closely with the 24-hour cycle of light and darkness. This circadian clock also controls other body functions, such as metabolism and temperature regulation.

Studies in animals have found that when that rhythm gets thrown off, health problems including obesity and metabolic disorders such as diabetes can arise. Studies of people who work night shifts have also revealed an increased susceptibility to diabetes.

A new study from MIT shows that a gene called SIRT1, previously shown to protect against diseases of aging, plays a key role in controlling these circadian rhythms. The researchers found that circadian function decays with aging in normal mice, and that boosting their SIRT1 levels in the brain could prevent this decay. Conversely, loss of SIRT1 function impairs circadian control in young mice, mimicking what happens in normal aging.

Since the SIRT1 protein itself was found to decline with aging in the normal mice, the findings suggest that drugs that enhance SIRT1 activity in humans could have widespread health benefits, says Leonard Guarente, the Novartis Professor of Biology at MIT and senior author of a paper describing the findings in the June 20 issue of Cell.

“If we could keep SIRT1 as active as possible as we get older, then we’d be able to retard aging in the central clock in the brain, and health benefits would radiate from that,” Guarente said.

Staying on schedule

In humans and animals, circadian patterns follow a roughly 24-hour cycle, directed by the circadian control center of the brain, called the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN), located in the hypothalamus.

“Just about everything that takes place physiologically is really staged along the circadian cycle,” Guarente sid. “What’s now emerging is the idea that maintaining the circadian cycle is quite important in health maintenance, and if it gets broken, there’s a penalty to be paid in health and perhaps in aging.”

Last year, Guarente found that a robust circadian period correlated with longer lifespan in mice. That got him wondering what role SIRT1, which has been shown to prolong lifespan in many animals, might play in that phenomenon. SIRT1, which Guarente first linked with aging more than 15 years ago, is a master regulator of cell responses to stress, coordinating a variety of hormone networks, proteins and genes to help keep cells alive and healthy.

To investigate SIRT1’s role in circadian control, Guarente and his colleagues created genetically engineered mice that produce different amounts of SIRT1 in the brain. One group of mice had normal SIRT1 levels, another had no SIRT1, and two groups had extra SIRT1—either twice or 10 times as much as normal.

Mice lacking SIRT1 had slightly longer circadian cycles (23.9 hours) than normal mice (23.6 hours), and mice with a 10-fold increase in SIRT1 had shorter cycles (23.1 hours).

In mice with normal SIRT1 levels, the researchers confirmed previous findings that when the 12-hour light/dark cycle is interrupted, younger mice readjust their circadian cycles much more easily than older ones. However, they showed for the first time that mice with extra SIRT1 do not suffer the same decline in circadian control as they age.

The researchers also found that SIRT1 exerts this control by regulating the genes BMAL and CLOCK, the two major keepers of the central circadian clock.

Enhancing circadian function

A growing body of evidence suggests that being able to respond to large or small disruptions of the light/dark cycle is important to maintaining healthy metabolic function, Guarente says.

“Essentially we experience a mini jet lag every day because the light cycle is constantly changing. The critical thing for us is to be able to adapt smoothly to these jolts,” Guarente said. “Many studies in mice say that while young mice do this perfectly well, it’s the old mice that have the problem. So that could well be true in humans.”

If so, it could be possible to treat or prevent diseases of aging by enhancing circadian function—either by delivering SIRT1 activators in the brain or developing drugs that enhance another part of the circadian control system, Guarente said.

“I think we should look at every aspect of the machinery of the circadian clock in the brain, and any intervention that can maintain that machinery with aging ought to be good,” he says. “One entry point would be SIRT1, because we’ve shown in mice that genetic maintenance of SIRT1 helps maintain circadian function.”

Some SIRT1 activators are now being tested against diabetes, inflammation and other diseases, but they are not designed to cross the blood-brain barrier and would likely not be able to reach the SCN. However, Guarente believes it could be possible to design SIRT1 activators that can get into the brain.

Roman Kondratov, an associate professor of biology at Cleveland State University, says the study raises several exciting questions regarding the potential to delay or reverse age-related changes in the brain through rejuvenation of the circadian clock with SIRT1 enhancement.

“The importance of this study is that it has both basic and potentially translational applications, taking into account the fact that pharmacological modulators of SIRT1 are currently under active study,” Kondratov said.

Researchers in Guarente’s lab are now investigating the relationship between health, circadian function and diet. They suspect that high-fat diets might throw the circadian clock out of whack, which could be counteracted by increased SIRT1 activation.

The research was funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Glenn Foundation for Medical Research.

dentistrytoday.com

Cause of Colorectal Cancer May Stem From Mouth Bacteria

There may be a newly discovered cause of colorectal cancer.

Two new studies indicate that a type of gut bacteria located in the mouth can cause colorectal cancer as a result of influencing the immune response and turning on cancer genes. The research team thinks this information could result in more efficient ways to diagnose, treat and possibly prevent colorectal cancer.

The information from the two studies appears in the August 14 issue of the online journal Cell Host & Microbe.

The gut contains trillions of bacteria, which outnumber the number of cells in our bodies. The microbe communities maintain their health by training the immune system and aiding in the digestion of food. The down side is that they could cause disease.

Previous studies have demonstrated that when there is an imbalance, the bacteria could cause colon cancer.

Of all cancers, colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of death for Americans. The researchers have determined Fusobacteria from the mouth are also plentiful in tissues of colorectal cancer patients.

The first study concluded that Fusobacteria in benign tumors can eventually become cancerous. In mice bred to have a form of colorectal cancer similar to that of humans, the bacteria increased the rate in which tumors formed.

In the second study, it was determined that Fusobacteria utilize a molecule that inhabits the surface of the bacterial cell. It then sticks to and attacks the human colorectal cancer cells.

dentistrytoday.com

Parents Need to be Careful with their Children's Pacifiers

 

Parents need to be careful with their children’s pacifiers. If not, dental decay could be the result.

Numerous studies show that dental decay can be transmitted to a child when an adult sucks on the pacifier to clean it.

A recent study in the journal Pediatrics goes into detail about this issue. There are few, if any, immunizing effects from adult saliva. Therefore, licking or sucking something to clean it off does nothing to get rid of germs.

It’s also important that parents don’t drip pacifiers in honey, juice, sweetened drinks or any kind of sugar. When exposed to those substances or anything with sugar, the result is often cavities or tooth decay.

The best way to clean a pacifier is to use something that is proven to be a disinfectant.

dentistrytoday.com

Results from large international clinical trials provide dentists and patients with a new level of confidence in dental implant

Results from two of the largest international clinical studies performed to date with dental implants have just been published and demonstrate excellent clinical performance. Together, the studies have evaluated more than one thousand Straumann Bone Level implants in Europe, the US and Australia. The scope of these studies is particularly remarkable in view of the fact that most dental implant companies do not conduct clinical trials because they want to cut costs and do not have the capabilities.

 The studies are also remarkable in that they both reported very high implant survival rates of more than 98% with practically no bone loss around the implants. The findings are considerably better than values reported in a comprehensive review of previously published studies with other implants[1]. The new studies add to the wealth of strong clinical evidence backing the Straumann dental implant system and thus provide very good reasons for patients and dentists to insist on Straumann implants rather than undocumented alternatives.

 

The benchmark in clinical research

The first study was a randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) at 11 clinical centers in Europe, USA and Australia[2]. RCTs are the benchmark in clinical research because they offer the highest level of clinical evidence. However, few are performed with dental implants and very rarely on such a large scale.

 This RCT has evaluated 106 patients each treated with one implant and followed for three years. The investigators compared the outcomes of two different approaches - the first involving two surgical steps, in which the implant is covered with gum tissue ('submerged') during healing, and the second involving just a single step, in which part of the implant is left exposed ('transmucosal') thus saving a second surgical operation. The most impressive highlight reported was the fact that only a single implant was lost, yielding 3-year implant-survival rates of 98.1% and 100% for the transmucosal and submerged groups respectively.

 Because bone loss around implants has been documented as a common undesirable effect of implant treatment[3], this study looked carefully at bone level changes. It showed that bone level was impressively stable over 3 years after implant placement, with mean decreases of less than 0.7 mm and 0.6 mm in the submerged and transmucosal groups respectively. These values are well below the data presented in previous studies with other implants. An analysis of published data showed that only three implant systems achieved mean marginal bone loss below 1 mm over a period of 5 years[1].

 

Excellent results also achieved in everyday practice

While RCTs demonstrate that products or treatments work well, they are usually conducted by specialists in selected and strictly controlled populations. This study was performed by dental practices and University clinics that are highly specialized in dental implantology, which raises the question of whether its excellent results can be reproduced in daily dental practice. To answer this, a large study using the same implant was conducted in Europe and the US, in which the dentists had to follow the product guidelines but were able to use the implant as they would in normal daily practice. The strength of this type of investigation, which is known as 'non-interventional study' (NIS), is that it documents real-life situations, in which indications, patients and conditions all vary widely.

 In this study[4], a total of 908 implants were evaluated in 538 patients at more than a hundred dental practices in six countries, revealing an implant survival rate of 98.5% after one year (the risk of failure is highest in the first year after implant placement5). Besides the very high survival rates, the bone level remained very stable in the majority of cases. The investigators therefore concluded that treatment with Straumann Bone Level Implants yielded very successful outcomes in 'real life' conditions.

 

Results impress further when viewed in the context of other published data

The survival rates reported in both studies are higher than those documented in the literature. The most recent analysis of published data on other implants showed an overall implant survival rate of 95.5% one year after implant placement[5], in contrast to the 98.5% achieved in this NIS in daily dental practice conditions.

 

Medicalnewstoday.com