> Cautious Mouthwash Use:

I was under the impression that poor dental hygiene is associated with Alzheimer's disease and dementia?

There’s poor dental hygiene and then there is nuking all the bacteria in your mouth with mouthwash.

You can have perfect dental hygiene and never use mouth wash in your life.

Just cause companies like selling you a product, doesn’t mean it’s good for you.

You don’t need to cause extinction events in your mouth twice a day to avoid poor dental hygiene.

It's better to think of your body as a walking city of interlinked organisms of different species than a single organism. They need you as much as you need them. Killing off some of those symbionts can have negative effects for the other party (you).

Mouthwash is indiscriminate in that it kills of a huge amount of bacteria, but some of those are actually useful.

> It's better to think of your body as a walking city of interlinked organisms of different species than a single organism. They need you as much as you need them. Killing off some of those symbionts can have negative effects for the other party (you).

> Mouthwash is indiscriminate in that it kills of a huge amount of bacteria, but some of those are actually useful.

> It's better to think of your body as a walking city of interlinked organisms of different species than a single organism. They need you as much as you need them. Killing off some of those symbionts can have negative effects for the other party (you).

> Mouthwash is indiscriminate in that it kills of a huge amount of bacteria, but some of those are actually useful.

Not true https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35946140/

Also some of those are quite harmful https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34666923/

Floss once or twice a day, maintain gum health, and watch your diet. You don't need mouthwash. (Anecdata - at my most recent visit, my dentist told me to come back in 18 months.)

That’s strange for your dentist to give up money like that lol.

But also, at dental cleanings they do things like polish your teeth. Do you also not require that?

As it was explained to me, flouride will work in repairing microscopic areas of decay so long as the surfaces of your teeth are ultra clean.

My dentist insists that I see the hygienist every 3 months for descaling, cleaning and basic checks.

For the cynics, the cost of this is negligible and I have not needed a filling or any other costly procedure for over a decade.

Ohhh, I misinterpreted your comment. I think other people did too.

It seemed as if you were saying that your dentist told you not to step foot in the dentist office at all for 18 months. But you just meant, the literal dentist doesn’t need to see you. Got it. I feel like this isn’t out of the ordinary now.

I always hear every 6 months for a cleaning. This new “3-month” information takes a bit away from your original statement since you are doing a bit more than what you suggested is required for maintaining healthy oral health.

Leading back to my original joke, maybe your dentist insisting that you need to get your teeth cleaned every 3 months is how they make their money lol!

You're replying to a different person, now =]

Thank you! I assumed that only the person that I asked a question to would respond to me lol.

'Leading back to my original joke, maybe your dentist insisting that you need to get your teeth cleaned every 3 months is how they make their money lol!'

They make their money from implants and advanced treatments costing multiple thousands, not the £100 hygienist fees.

A hygenist, plus a nurse, seeing a maximum of 8 patients a day at £100 a time isn't a business I would want to be investing in.

Fluoride won’t but hydroxyapatite will.

I've had my fair share of dentists who do unnecessary treatments. Really like this one.

Re the polishing, I guess not? Since I switched to an electric toothbrush a few years ago my teeth definitely stay smoother longer.

Mouthwash is not really a dental hygiene thing.

If you need to use mouthwash to prevent bad breath even when you brush your teeth and clean your mouth properly, you need to look into what might be causing that problem in the first place. Mouthwash is like a duct-tape workaround and probably not very healthy for you either.

Btw - interdental toothbrushes. If you’re not using them already, you may want to start. Very helpful. Much better than flossing which has some problems associated with it.

> interdental toothbrushes. If you’re not using them already, you may want to start. Very helpful. Much better than flossing

Interdental brushes are IN ADDITION to, not instead of flossing.

Interdental brushes, by definition, cannot get down to the gumline gap between tooth and gum. Something which ONLY correct flossing can do.

Ask your hygienist next time you see them.

I really want to know, why don't we all supplement with L-arginine long term? Time-release capsules are available and I have taken for numerous issues like RSI to great success. Whats the downside to long term usage?

Side bar : L citrulline is thought to be more effective than arginine.

One downside that I don’t see discussed much, as I’ve watched multiple recalls over recent years for supposed contamination of things like tmao and other toxins in either the manufacturing process or packaging process, I wonder how many supplements are contaminated. I have never seen an analysis even from the vendors who do pretty hefty chemical composition analysis.

> I wonder how many supplements are contaminated. I have never seen an analysis even from the vendors who do pretty hefty chemical composition analysis.

Why do you think food supplements would be more contaminated than other processed foods? Or even things like toothpaste or shampoo, those are also made from highly processes ingredients.

There's a large amount of precedence, that's why. Rather than asking the room, one would think the first step would be to obtain information and inform yourself.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5753965/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34022259/

https://theconversation.com/natural-supplements-can-be-dange...

Why so defensive? I'm asking the room because it's a smart room, usually, and often there's someone who'll be far better informed than I could be with a quick search. That's literally why I spend time here.

Regarding your links, I'm sure I could find similar studies about nearly any kind of food. I have a friend who won't eat peanuts because he's afraid of aflotoxins, which are real, genuinely dangerous, and if you think that peanut products are tested well enough to 100% guarantee the aflotoxins are always below safe levels in all peanut products you'll ever eat... Well, I'll disagree.

https://inspection.canada.ca/food-safety-for-industry/food-c...

So again, why do you think supplements are worse than other food products? I don't agree that your links answer this question.

They do show that there's often contaminants in supplements. They _don't_ show that supplements are unusual in this regard when compared to other food products.

Your third link focuses on heavy metals in supplements. Here's a similar study showing they are also in baby food:

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/heavy-metals-in-baby-foo...

So is it just supplements and baby food? Unlikely. More likely it's that supplements and baby food are both things that make people worry about contamination, so they test them more. Meanwhile your ketchup might be loaded with all kinds of contaminants but you'd never think of testing it.

"These things are also contaminated" is shoddy argumentative reasoning at best, it is not the "got ya" that you think it is . I never claimed that there aren't contaminants in food, and I don't see how it defeats my claim that dietary supplements are unsafe -- the FDA is more stringent in regulation and testing with respect to food, as opposed to dietary supplements, because, you know, we need to eat to survive.

Please take a second to read my comment here, before responding: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36930128

One would think the first step would be to look it up.

> Most healthy people do not need to supplement with arginine because it is a component of all protein-containing foods[15] and can be synthesized in the body from glutamine via citrulline.

I do not understand how someone can wish to know something, but refuse to expend effort to obtain the information they wish to seek? I hope it would be ok for you to explain this behaviour, please?

This seems unfairly aggressive. GP asked what the downside is to preventatively taking l-arganine as a supplement, your quote addresses only whether it's required.

In short, you can't test your own blood so you don't know when your levels may be low. If there were no downsides to constantly supplementing then what reasons may there be to not do this?

That is I think the actual question.

My quote answers the question of "why don't we all supplement with L-arginine long term" with "it's in basically all protein containing-foods, so it is not necessary".

While you are right there may be individual variation, the rule of medical advice is that we cannot assume what we do not know, and preventative ingesting of a substance that is not too well understood may have unintended side-effects. Especially in the case of synthetic synthesis.

It is unfairly aggressive and they did this twice just in this thread. The other was here:

> There's a large amount of precedence, that's why. Rather than asking the room, one would think the first step would be to obtain information and inform yourself.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36930036

I don't know why this person feels the need to roam around the conversation policing how people are engaging in it. It's incredibly obnoxious. Especially frustrating given that they do seem to have some information to share, which they could do and just omit the completely gratuitous and unwarranted hostility.

I clearly made a point of inquiring why the behaviour was performed, it was an honest inquiry, I am genuinely curious.

> taking care to be polite

If what you consider “polite”, several people call out as aggressive, then maybe you should re-evaluate your definition of the word.

Your comment does not read polite. At best, passive aggressive.

Asking questions fosters discussion. For a site centered around discussion, that seems warranted. Telling people to just look it up is pretty much the antithesis of discussion.

> Telling people to just look it up is pretty much the antithesis of discussion.

On the contrary, the quality of discussion would be much higher if people took one entire minute beforehand to research something. It is shameful and disappointing that the techbros here cannot be bothered to do this, and prefer to live in ignorance.

That doesn’t necessarily answer his question though and doesn’t even seem like a well reasoned point. Just because your body can produce something doesn’t mean it can’t benefit from more.

Likewise just because your body requires something doesn't mean that large doses of it are beneficial. See my followups, which address that and were written 30 minutes before your post :/

Arginine has good short-term endothelial effects but bad long term effects. Most studies last <1 month observing the good effects but not monitoring future bad effects:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4069264/

I am skeptical of this because as far as I understand, Arginine is naturally occurring in many foods.

> I want to stress that I'm no expert

No kidding. (Sorry, but I work with GPT more than enough every day to recognize its style)

Not to diminish the value of the comment itself, but please don't mislead people.

I took beetroot as a supplement, it worked well. Ginkgo Biloba also increases nitric oxide.

I've had negative effects from strong antioxidant supplements before. I think there could be a lot of reasons why.

What kind of negative effects? Cognitive ones?

It felt like I had had too much sugar (inflammation).

> I took beetroot as a supplement, it worked well.

By what measure?

I was comparing various ways of boosting my nitric oxide at the time. I could see it visibly (increased red complexion) and my cognition also improved. Subjective, yes, but that was good enough.

Combined flushing niacin with beetroot did wonders for me.

Betaine is another thing to look at. One of the cheapest supplements, no (or very low) toxicity, and seems to regulate NO metabolism, among other things.

Look up Bhramari Pranayama. Humming directly increases nitric oxide levels.

Do you have a reference? (About the relation.)

Humming increasing nitric oxide production is well documented. Here is one journal article but there are others:

https://erj.ersjournals.com/content/22/2/323

Nitric Oxide dilates the nasal passages and is also a vasodilator as well. A simple n=1 test is to do nasal humming and test blood pressure before and after. I can typically get a (temporary) 10 point drop.

Nitric Oxide is also anti-bacterial and humming may help clear sinus infections.

One wonders about gut biome and whether any microorganisms there have any effect on this.

One also wonders how humanity can adapt to dramatically extended lifetimes without obliterating our planet.

> Nitrate-Rich Diet: Consuming foods high in nitrates, such as beetroot, leafy greens, and other vegetables, might promote the production of nitric oxide.

I don't think maximizing dietary nitrate is a good idea, since the nitrite that's an intermediate in this pathway is definitely carcinogenic (forming nitrosamines).

But if your diet lacks kale, arugula, Swiss Chard, spinach, beets, cabbage, cauliflower, carrots and broccoli one might do something about it.

If someone tells me kale is carcinogenic imma lose it because it does not taste good. I’m not eating this for fun you know.

Have you only tried it raw? There are ways to cook it without losing too much nutrients. Cooked kale still has noticeable health benefits according to some studies I found.

Raw or cooked... the only way kale tastes good is when it's the garnish on a steak that gets thrown away at the end of a meal.

You should try it southern or soul food style similar to how collard greens are cooked. It’s cooked along with meat and a bunch of seasonings. Definitely a different flavor. But also less healthful.

Just as a personal opinion: I hate the way kale tastes. I also hate coffee. I love broccoli and tons of other greens. I love tea.

The only way I enjoy kale is having it as garnish that gets tossed away.

my better half loves steamed kale. no amount of salts and seasonings has changed my mind. cheese and salt/pepper took me from a broccoli hater into a broccoli lover lol.

but I digress.

Broccoli is disgusting if not prepared well.

Chop it small (the stems really small) add sliced garlic, sliced hot pepper, some olive oil and a cup of water then cook it for 3-4 minutes only. Drink the water and (if you must) serve with lots of cheese and bacon. (add the cheese immediately or it wont melt)

Like with broth, the first day it tastes good. If you prepare it again within the next 2 days the body screams for more. Specially the water is funny, it feels as if some magic potion.

Biohacking The Oral Microbiome https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5DPQPvJ3m4

We can all prompt ChatGPT.

Littering the web with its output is against good netizenship. I understand it's inevitable and a matter of time, but it's still aggravating.

who cares how it was produced as long as it's useful...

Maybe do not sign it under your name, if it is a quote.

And if it is a quote from an unreliable source, the more important to note it.

Because it's not useful, it's an invitation to go fact check everything in the list.

> We can all prompt ChatGPT.

I'm largely blind to this. If they're not wordy and overly polite, pasted ChatGPT answers just don't appear on my radar.

Can someone help me out? What points to this answer in particular being from ChatGPT?

Chatgpt loves lists like this, then length and "tone" can be the most obvious indicators. You can modify those attributes through prompting but that should help find unmodified output

Brief summarization that seems redundant to the topic because it's the model priming itself to generate a response in the requested form, which is usually a:

3-10 item list which mentions certain phrases related to the prompt every time ("nitric oxide" here).

Disclaimer about accuracy/expertise.

So actually, it's a well formed answer?

It very likely bears a close resemblance to a member of the theoretical set of all well-formed answers.

Problem is all the other sets it belongs to, including the set of all answers containing unverified factual statements, not to mention the set of answers that resemble the output of a large language model.

Some tell-tale signs (I work with GPT a lot as I mentioned in a sibling comment):

- It's a list, it's numbered, it's got pretty consistent markdown formatting. This is especially present with ChatGPT

- Title Casing In Each List Item

- Strong usage of the passive voice

- Strong CYA tone. "might promote", "studies suggest", "has been associated", "can convert", "possibly lowering", "thought to increase"

The general structure is very consistent with GPT too. Once you've seen a lot of sessions it's just... plain obvious. Especially if you step back and think: "Would people actually.. write like this?"

Sure, but hints are not proof. In fact,

> Would people actually[] write like this?

: some people do. What you call «CYA tone» can overlap with what for others is "precision".

It is the quality of the text, then, that hints further to actual intelligence or "artificial struggle".

GPT4 can generate some extraordinarily high quality text if you know how to prompt it. But this ain't it - it's some of the most boring way to prompt. The OP's response is what happens when you prompt with some article summary and a "What are some possible ways we could increase the production of nitric oxide in the body".

And no, that trashy CYA tone is not "precision", if anything, it's vagueness. It's weasel words.

> no, that trashy CYA tone is not "precision", if anything, it's vagueness. It's weasel words

That is not what I said. /That/ «trashy CYA tone is not "precision"». But some use similar expressions to those you noted in order to be factual.

Some texts give a strong impression of fakery; some texts could give a wrong impression upon brutal use of raw Bayesian indicators. Signs orient, do not decide. Hints are not proof.

Some patterns in LLM output can be caricatures of proper efforts (factuality for precision, when relevant, is one of them).

So, people may write similarly to that. (Only, hopefully, well beyond veneer.)

Well, considering it was trained from content created from how people actually write, yes?

Ah yes, just like how I know most of my american friends have exactly 0.78 kids.

> Cautious Mouthwash Use:

My dental hygienist explicitly advises against mouthwash use.

IIRC the argument given to me was that the bacteria in the mouth eventually build up a resistance to the mouthwash, i.e. similar concept to antibiotic misuse.

Good diet, correct brushing twice a day, and correct flossing once a day is all that is required. Along with an annual visit to the dentist.

I'd like to add(0, •) another item to your list:

0. Stop mouth breathing and do nasal breathing whenever possible because only the latter produces nitric oxide, see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_functions_of_nitr...

The older I get the more ways I find out that mouthbreathing is harmful. I wish someone had tried to do something when I was a kid.

Mouth taping is not very popular outside some kinky circles.

No one said you'd need to tape your mouth to do nasal breathing.

Most of the problems with NO production happen during the night when people tend to breathe through the mouth, making them tired during the day. Moreover, their CO2 levels tank as well for a double negative effect from what was supposed to be a refreshing sleep.

Daily viagra for anyone over 60? Or one raw garlic a day? Those increase NO levels rapidly as well.

+1 on L-citrulline, caution on supplement quality - many manufacturers sell 2:1 citrulline malate to reduce costs which means you effectively need to double the dose to actually consume a given target dose.

What you listed here is essentially an evidence based diet and one of its most prominent proponents is Dr. Michael Greger with his works around "How not to die".

He for example features his Daily Dozen: https://nutritionfacts.org/daily-dozen-challenge/

Put in reverse: no meat, eggs, diary.

I might add that there are neuroprotective foods as well, just for reference: https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/15/5/3517

Nitric acid is formed during sun exposure.

Reminds me that the healthiest activity during the pandemic was being at the beach and losing weight. Unfortunately that wasn’t stressed enough.