First law of dentistry: Any innovation that does not increase dentist margin, will not reach market.
To expand on this argument. I think even medical health care is more open to innovation that mainly benefits consumer health. Doctors are kind of oblivious of the cost of procedures. This has a host of other problems, but at least innovation and health outcomes are aligned (and less aligned with cost). Dentists are massively private equity owned where I live. Bottom line is everything. You notice that where you’re in the chair. Six minute procedures (the billing time) always take seven. Kids are state insured and always get upsold to whatever procedure is fashionable (or should I say: has the highest margin). I have a strong feeling innovations are swallowed up and shelved in this sector. It makes sense for the PE to kill innovation once you have a market cornered.
The only thing this anti market rant (not my usual spiel) does not have is an explanation for how PE coordinates the suppression of innovation. I should look into the owners of the parties that deliver the dentist supplies and machinery. That would be the best way to corner a market, by owning the supply chain as well.
I understand the negative outlook, but consider that this invention, being less-invasive, could be a draw to some patients. With the saturation of dental offices, some are trying to position themselves as higher-end "spas" with gentle-touch services and/or for people with sensory issues. So it's not just margin, it can also be market-share oriented.
I would not be too sure of this with current administration upheaval. The health system is broken in bad and good ways now. If you build it, it can succeed much to the chagrin of well paid dental 'experts'
I am a big believer in this. Dentistry is one of the largest grifts in modern medicine, I would put it up there with Chiropractors. Go see 5 dentists and you will get 5 wildly different opinions. I am certain there are good ones out there but it’s way too hard to evaluate.
Unlike other areas of medicine it’s also one of those frustrating areas because there are interesting devices, pastes and tools that should be easy to purchase but are locked behind the gates of a prescription.
"The Department of Health and Human Services is directing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to make new recommendations on the addition of fluoride to U.S. water sources. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has blamed the fluoridation of water for a number of health problems."
In Finland there is a profession called dental hygienist, whom I visit once a year. They clean up my teeth with an ultrasound device since many years, removing tartar.
In the US most visit that person twice a year. They have that ultrasound machine, but they only use it on people who don't visit that often - the machine just gets the build up do the point where manual tools can finish the job. If you brush/floss and visit regularly the manual tools are all they need.
In this was at least it looks like the US system is better. Of course there is no way nuance can be expressed in a short forum like this, but maybe you need to look at the Finland system to see if it is really good enough.
I went 14 years between dental visits, and the move to ultrasound cleaning was the biggest change I noticed. The cleaning had always been a bloody affair, scraping and scratching in a way that would leave me with a throbbing pain after my appointment was ove. The ultrasound cleaning was like science fiction.
First law of dentistry: Any innovation that does not increase dentist margin, will not reach market.
To expand on this argument. I think even medical health care is more open to innovation that mainly benefits consumer health. Doctors are kind of oblivious of the cost of procedures. This has a host of other problems, but at least innovation and health outcomes are aligned (and less aligned with cost). Dentists are massively private equity owned where I live. Bottom line is everything. You notice that where you’re in the chair. Six minute procedures (the billing time) always take seven. Kids are state insured and always get upsold to whatever procedure is fashionable (or should I say: has the highest margin). I have a strong feeling innovations are swallowed up and shelved in this sector. It makes sense for the PE to kill innovation once you have a market cornered.
The only thing this anti market rant (not my usual spiel) does not have is an explanation for how PE coordinates the suppression of innovation. I should look into the owners of the parties that deliver the dentist supplies and machinery. That would be the best way to corner a market, by owning the supply chain as well.
Instead of skillfully probing, they can take pictures and then do the probing where it looks suspicious. Probably another 6 minutes added.
Downside is that there is now a document to argue over in a malpractice lawsuit.
I understand the negative outlook, but consider that this invention, being less-invasive, could be a draw to some patients. With the saturation of dental offices, some are trying to position themselves as higher-end "spas" with gentle-touch services and/or for people with sensory issues. So it's not just margin, it can also be market-share oriented.
I would not be too sure of this with current administration upheaval. The health system is broken in bad and good ways now. If you build it, it can succeed much to the chagrin of well paid dental 'experts'
I am a big believer in this. Dentistry is one of the largest grifts in modern medicine, I would put it up there with Chiropractors. Go see 5 dentists and you will get 5 wildly different opinions. I am certain there are good ones out there but it’s way too hard to evaluate.
Unlike other areas of medicine it’s also one of those frustrating areas because there are interesting devices, pastes and tools that should be easy to purchase but are locked behind the gates of a prescription.
this is just a product that is easier to use?
i dont see why it couldnt reach the market
My favorite conspiracy theory stuff are the multiple unused caries vaccine patents by the dental care industry.
Do you mind picking to some of these? I did a quick Google patents search but didn't find anything.
Colgate Palmolive 1973: https://patents.google.com/patent/US3931398A/en
Merck & Co 1979: https://patents.google.com/patent/US4287173A/en
Lion Corp 1983: https://patents.google.com/patent/US4693888A/en
In all likelihood these just didn't work, but the commercial interest to not have caries immunization is just too juicy not to theorize!
Fluoride based toothpaste does not increase dentist margin though right?
> toothpaste is usually self-administered haha
very funny. this is a toothbrush, unless you have someone brush your teeth it is always self administered
> Fluoride based toothpaste does not increase dentist margin though right?
I mean, that's under attack now.
https://www.npr.org/2025/04/10/g-s1-59452/hhs-rfk-fluoride-d...
"The Department of Health and Human Services is directing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to make new recommendations on the addition of fluoride to U.S. water sources. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has blamed the fluoridation of water for a number of health problems."
First introduced in 1914! Suppressing a current practice is way harder than suppressing an innovation via buy-and-die.
True.
Fluoride as ingredient is questionable for human heath despite of what the marketing spread
Do you have any reputable evidence that fluorinated toothpaste is harmful (assuming normal usage)?
toothpaste is usually self-administered haha
This could be an innovation: toothbrush with built-in toothpaste dispenser.
From 2011: https://techcrunch.com/2011/03/22/actually-a-good-idea-tooth...
Nice find. However, I'm using an electric toothbrush. And the dispensing could be more automatic.
Already a product, typically/always marketed as a travel toothbrush.
I think most of the people do not even know how much calcium or other supplements they need on a daily or weekly basis to keep their teeth healthy.
Can you point to the research?
Reading comprehension? "I think..."
In Finland there is a profession called dental hygienist, whom I visit once a year. They clean up my teeth with an ultrasound device since many years, removing tartar.
I would not call it exactly painless though.
In the US most visit that person twice a year. They have that ultrasound machine, but they only use it on people who don't visit that often - the machine just gets the build up do the point where manual tools can finish the job. If you brush/floss and visit regularly the manual tools are all they need.
In this was at least it looks like the US system is better. Of course there is no way nuance can be expressed in a short forum like this, but maybe you need to look at the Finland system to see if it is really good enough.
I went 14 years between dental visits, and the move to ultrasound cleaning was the biggest change I noticed. The cleaning had always been a bloody affair, scraping and scratching in a way that would leave me with a throbbing pain after my appointment was ove. The ultrasound cleaning was like science fiction.
It's..it's not a toothbrush
[dead]