Re: research study on OP

Of course this is something you know intuitively the first few times you pull. But we need our studies to be convinced. Although I'm not sure why anymore. Studies and clinical trials are compromised to steer profitable "outcomes", non-compromised studies are spun to the public to have their conclusions misprepresented etc.

A classic case of the latter is the recent headline that the media has repeated at nauseum that cancer survival rates have had major increases in the last two years. And the huge media exposure only reinforces the perception that there's been an astounding breakthrough in mainstream cancer care that the world needs to know about RIGHT NOW! Read the fine print and you see that this is about only a 2% increase in survival (defined as living for 5 years with the stuff) in the last two years. Significant? Even putting aside differences in early detection, different ways of sampling or definitions of survival, etc, it doesn't even crack the margin of error for sampling or reporting. In other words, by all practical and statistical standards there's been no significant improvement if any despite all the manufactured public opinion.

If studies of OP showed long term a decrease of 2% in oral health related issues, believe me it wouldn't make fox news or CNN (unless as proof that another atlernative therapy was an ineffective hoax). Sorry, just had to vent - I do that alot these days.